RF Sitrep 20150226

RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 26 February 2015

DEBALTSEVO. The Kiev forces abandoned the “cauldron” leaving enormous quantities of equipment behind (including the last of the 3 counter mortar radars the US supplied) and many corpses. Poroshenko is completely delusional (“betrayal” is a good word) and his delusion is shared by Washington – read it and watch it; for reality, here are the words of the people trapped there. There’s nothing more that can be said – the Kiev forces were fully surrounded before Minsk, Poroshenko refused to believe it, the WMSM believed him (Again. Why?) and, of course Washington and its megaphones are pretending that it was some sort of violation. Supplying more weapons to the side that started with most of the heavy weapons and all of the air is supposed to do what, exactly? (Well, Kiev is fresh out of US counter-mortar radars). Debaltsevo short film, long film. There’s lots out there: take the time you would otherwise waste watching “the news” to look at them; it’s also perfectly obvious that these are not Russian soldiers but locals who want to get out of the freak show.

CEASEFIRE. After the Kiev forces retreated in a so-called “orderly fashion”, Debaltsevo has been cleared out. Gradually, grudgingly, heavy weapons are being pulled back to locations where they will be out of range. Another shattering defeat for Kiev – the Western sources blame it all on Russia but they are wrong. Sending unwilling, untrained conscripts and crazed neo-nazi fanatics, led by incompetents, up against defenders of their kith and kin is not a winning combination in any place or time. Read what a British Army “volunteer” had to say but forget the “poor kit stuff” – the militias had exactly the same weapons – the very same in many cases. I doubt this is the end, if for no other reason than the neo-nazis don’t want to give up: Yarosh’s own words. Protest in Kiev yesterday.

FOOLS, LIARS AND HYSTERIA. Chaos in Libya is nothing to do with NATO. John Kerry says “Ukrainians are coming together to define their own future”. Existential threat to the military alliance that spends 56% of the world’s total! Russian Latvian aircraft attack. Must spend more money because RT is winning the propaganda battle (the USA outspends RT 3 to 1 and then there’s the BBC to add on.) Can’t get Russian weapons on e-Bay (get them here or Ukrainian Lend-Lease, repair them here). Will this bubble of hysteria get bigger and louder until it pops? Or will it lead us into war with Russia? “American foreign policy is controlled by fools.

FAKES. First a US Senator and then a German TV channel caught using old photos as “proof” of Russian invasions. Trees and mountains, people, it’s a clue. And the Brits too: don’t you know that photos handed to you by some guy in an alley can be sourced? Guardian backtracks on pseudo-analysis; yes, crater analysis works, sort of, but not from satellite photos. I though the MSM prided itself on its layers of fact checkers. The only rational conclusion remains: if there were real evidence, you’d see it; fake evidence is evidence that there is no evidence. QED.

OOPS. A Lithuanian TV station asked viewers if they had noticed increasing Russian propaganda; 82% responded that it wasn’t “propaganda”, it was true. Truth, not big money, is why Russian “propaganda” is winning. Falsehood is why Western propaganda is losing. That and absurdities.

DE-DOLLARISATION. A few more steps: given the occasional threats that Russia will be kicked out of SWIFT, it has begun to set up its own process. The Duma ratified the BRICS development bank. Russia unloaded more US securities in December (and so did Japan and China).

UKRAINE. Money collapsed, currency controls, rationing, defeats, corpses, destruction. Worse to come. Many many people warned of this 18 months ago. None of its new friends will pour more money down the hole. All they’re going to get are more guns to produce more defeats. Another failure following Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya. There are those who think chaos is the aim. If so, another success.

MAIDAN SNIPERS. Probably not a coincidence that just after the BBC actually questions the Party Line, Poroshenko “discovers” that Putindunnit.

IRAN. Russia went along with sanctions and stopped the sale of S-300 SAMs to Iran. It has just offered a more modern system. Washington objects; I doubt Moscow cares any more what Washington thinks. I’ll bet Victoria Nuland told her bosses there was nothing Moscow could do.

SAAKASHVILI. Saakashvili was appointed an advisor to Poroshenko. Tbilisi wants Saakashvili on trial; it’s not amused that Kiev won’t extradite him. Ah! the troubles of Washington’s quondam democratic heroes.

© Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Ottawa, Canada Websites: ROPV, US-Russia, Russia Insider

Ten Good Reasons to Hate Putin: Or, rather, why our “leaders” hate him

http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/02/23/3794

Russians love him. The Levada polling organisation (not especially friendly to Putin) has been polling about him for 15 years. His lowest rating – lowest rating – (did I say lowest?) was 61% in June 2000, these days it’s in the 80s. (Question 1, Long Trend). Most Western politicians would sell their mothers into slavery to get up to 61%. But, asks the puzzled NYT reader, why would Russians like him? Results, that’s why; check out the illustration. You’d like it too, if you had a leadership team half as effective.

15 years of Putin

He’s popular outside too. Despite widespread belief in the servile Western media that Putin is “isolated”, a lot of countries are happy to invite him to visit. The photo that says it all is here.

He’s macho. When he takes his photographer along in his “private” moments, it’s to show him wrestling tigers, petting leopards, landing large fish, wearing tough guy headgear, hurling people around the judo mat. What do our leaders do in their photographed “private” moments? Golf.

Even the false rumours about him are macho. Affairs with beautiful young women, not pedophilia or secret homosexuality.

He’s got a real army. With air defences, fighter planes, modern tanks, tough special forces. So a fun little air campaign won’t be possible. Besides, Russia hasn’t lost many wars, has it? And they never give up; just ask the Mongols.

Nukes. Russia has them; they work: Bulava, Topol and Sineva. Meanwhile, in the USA not so much.

He’s Russian. And Russians are all horrible. Except for Pussy Riot.

He’s smarter than our team. Well… doesn’t he prove this every day?

You can’t bully him. Ditto.

He’s not going anywhere. He’s staying right there in Russia. And that, for the geographically challenged, is a great big country not very far from anywhere.

And one bonus reason. He knows gold is a better investment than US Treasuries.

And just one more. Russian babes say they like him. Imagine the campaign “Babes for (insert the name of your wearisome leader)”. Didn’t think you could imagine it without feeling a bit nauseous. Well, OK, there was Obamagirl. But that was fake.

US-Russia.org Discussion Group: Why the Minsk-2 Settlement of the Ukrainian Crisis Will Hold

http://us-russia.org/2982-why-the-minsk-2-settlement-of-the-ukrainian-crisis-will-hold.html

While the Minsk-2 agreement is better than nothing and may lead to something eventually – after all, everything leads to something – it is at best the beginning of the beginning of the end.

There are two very serious flaws with the agreement.

The first is that there are several thousand Kiev troops surrounded in the “Debaltsevo Cauldron”; the agreement makes no provision for their evacuation or surrender. We are told that Poroshenko does not believe they are surrounded; but they are – there is plenty of film (for example) of the enclosure. There is no way that the Novorussian forces will allow them to stay there; they remember the Kiev forces at the Donetsk Airport continuously shelled Donetsk throughout the last “ceasefire”. They also remember Poroshenko boasting that the last “ceasefire” had been used to bring the Kiev forces back to 100%. And, today, fighting there continues and will continue until the Kiev forces take up the offer to depart without their weapons (surrenders are beginning, for example) or are destroyed.

The second problem are the neo-nazi “volunteer battalions”. They are not interested in compromise; to them a ceasefire is betrayal. They have many times threatened to return to Kiev and clean out the “defeatists” and “traitors” there. One day they will make that attempt.

In short, Poroshenko does not control his forces.

These two problems are enough to suggest that Minsk-2 will not produce a settlement or even a continuous ceasefire.

And the above ignores any meddling from Washington.

Thus, I cannot share the optimism.

Duh! I don’t Unnerstand Yer Kwestyun: Cause I’m just a dumb cluck (or I think you are)

http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/02/14/3491

But one of us is pretty stupid

This video is a good laugh – it’s an old one but still worth watching as an illustration of the level of falsehood of our “leaders” and how stupid they think we are.

Those nasty Russians are at NATO’s doorstep; never mind that NATO keeps moving the doorstep, those nasty Russians are just nasty.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LexhW8SCM2c

BTW is Matt Lee the only reporter in the USA?

FLASH!!! US Senator makes Stunning Geographical Discovery: The fabled mountain passes dividing Russia and Ukraine

http://russia-insider.com/en/flash-us-senator-makes-stunning-geographical-discovery/ri3481

US Senator Inhofe passed out photographs of the Latest Russian Invasion of Ukraine. None of his staff who “worked to independently verify and confirm the authenticity of the photos” seems to have bothered to wonder where the mountain range separating Russian and Ukraine was.

Nor did they stop to think that a tank column like the one shown would surely appear on satellite photos.

And of course they didn’t do a search on Google to see if the photos were from somewhere else.

Nor do they know that, in the digital photo era, photos have time and location data.

The whole absurd story is here http://fortressamerica.gawker.com/senator-duped-into-using-old-photos-to-promote-new-wa-1685511541

What a pity that the fraud was exposed before it could have been enthusiastically picked up by the NYT, CNN, Economist and the rest of the House of Presstitution.

RF Sitrep 20150212

RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 12 February 2015

AGREEMENT. Ceasefire. Pull-back of heavy weapons. Autonomy talks. OSCE. Does Poroshenko mean it? Can he deliver? Will Washington let him? What happens if there’s a “nazi spring” in Kiev? Or in Galicia? The Donbass wants out. Will the WMSM stop its propaganda? (If Putin is so determined to conquer Ukraine why has he twice signed an agreement by which the Donbass stays there?). There’s no provision for vigorous enforcement. The Debaltsevo pocket isn’t cleared. It’s too much like the last agreement when Kiev forces never pulled back and never stopped shelling. At best, a first small step; at worst, a pause so Kiev can try again (here’s Poroshenko explaining they used the last pause to re-arm).

DÉJÀ VU ALL OVER AGAIN. Obama says the US “brokered a deal on Ukraine”. Interesting slip: Washington wasn’t part of the 21 February 2014 agreement. Perhaps he’s referring to two American officials deciding the new Ukrainian government without reference (well one) to the EU. The ineffable Jen Psaki explains that’s not what he meant. Perhaps he meant to say “broke the deal”.

IF YOU WANT ENEMIES, WE CAN DO THAT TOO. Revealing photo: why are Putin and Lukashenko smiling and the other three not? Have Hollande and Merkel just had a reality check? Could it be something like this: NATO says it’s taking “necessary measures to respond to the challenges posed by Russia and their strategic implications” and lumps Russia in with “risks and threats” in the southern neighbourhood; “Russia’s aggression against Ukraine is not an isolated incident, but a game-changer in European security”. Should Russia treat these statements from the world’s most powerful military alliance as empty prattle? Or should it ask itself why it’s selling energy to countries that call it an enemy?

MORE REALITY. The Debaltsevo pocket traps several thousand Kiev troops. (Maps and videos). More talk of “betrayal” and the like. It is said that a million Ukrainians of military age have fled to Russia joining another million or so. Here’s a video from eastern Ukraine illustrating the reaction to the latest conscription. Deserters can now be shot. German intelligence says the death toll is more like 50,000. Neo-nazis carefully ignored by WMSM. And the solution is more weapons? Kiev started with most of the weapons and has been regularly defeated. The rebels now even have an aircraft they captured. If you prefer, here’s a Kiev side account: victory all the way!

LITVINENKO DEATH. At last the words “Ichkeria” and “nuclear weapons” have surfaced in the London enquiry. Always been my favourite theory and Gordon Hahn’s too.

ECONOMY. We have official numbers for 2014. GDP was up 0.6%, the January-November trade balance was US$176 billion, up 0.6%; industrial production up 1.7%. On the bad side, the consumer price index rose 7.8% while real disposable income fell 1%. Capital flight (so-called) was US$151.5 billion but 85% of that was actually debt repayment (see below). The RUB/USD exchange worsened from 33 to 56. Oil prices are creeping up gradually. Hardly Obama’s “economy in tatters”.

RUSSIA’S EXTERNAL DEBT. It’s being paid off quickly – here’s a report.

REPORTERS COMMIT REPORTING! “Dramatic video has emerged of the moment a soup kitchen was hit by Ukrainian military rockets.” This is first time I’ve seen a Western media outlet telling the truth that Kiev forces are routinely shelling civilians; always before where the shots come from has been a Great Mystery. “Untold story of the Maidan massacre”! What’s next: suddenly unsuppressed MH17 reports?

SANCTIONS. The Spanish Foreign Minister estimates that Russia’s food sanctions have cost the EU €21 billion. Meanwhile Turkey’s food exports have gone way up. Ditto Argentina’s. Whatever happens, I think the Europeans have lost most of that market.

TURK STREAM. First stages underway. How’s the EU doing on building its connection?

ISOLATED RUSSIA. China again supports Russia. China, Russia and India vow to “build a more just, fair and stable international political and economic order”. An excellent trip to Egypt and, maybe, new relations with Greece. Not “isolated” either.

DELUSION. Saakashvili thinks a properly armed and prepared Ukrainian army has the “spirit” to capture all of Russia. Soros and BHL tell us Ukraine is a “participatory democracy; a noble adventure”. McCain thinks that arming the side that began with all the weapons and lost anyway is a good idea; Graham says it will make him “feel better”. Poroshenko thinks Russian soldiers would carry passports with them.

© Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Ottawa, Canada Websites: ROPV, US-Russia, Russia Insider

RF Sitrep 20150129

RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 29 January 2015

RUSSIA HAS HAD ENOUGH. I agree, as I usually do, with Alexander Mercouris: here and here he argues that Putin and his team have given up trying for a diplomatic solution. Moscow used its influence to stop the rebels’ offensive last year when they believed themselves on the edge of routing the Kiev forces, forced the Minsk ceasefire, made several proposals to Kiev and… nothing. I believe that Putin stopped believing anything the West said after Libya, but I think he kept hoping Europe would not be willing to harm itself in subjugation to Washington. Or maybe he just needed time; time to strengthen links with the BRICS and especially Beijing, time to de-dollarise (Russia is buying a lot of gold), time to build up and exercise the military; time to make his case to the “not-the-world” (I love this cartoon). I’m sure he has the next move figured out and I’m equally sure Brussels, Washington and their dependants will be just as stunned by it as they were the last times.

RUSSIAN ECONOMY. Two takes on it that argue that the situation is serious but recoverable: Goldman Sachs repeats points I have mentioned; Chris Weafer says rally but not boom. Yes inflation is up, yes the Ruble is down, but there much import substitute is going on, industrial and agricultural production continue to rise and unemployment is unchanged. As for rating downgrades, China has a different opinion. Time, as they say, will tell. But I’d bet on China.

DEMOGRAPHICS. Excellent summary by Anatoly Karlin. By the way, Russia now has a higher crude birth rate than anywhere in Europe.

GAS. After welcoming the decision to stop South Stream, the Europeans are starting to realise that they had better build some infrastructure to pick up Russian gas. Nordstream too. Or do without. Or find another supplier. Or something. They’ve got about four years. Here’s the new reality.

FIGHTING. Putin made a last appeal for both sides to withdraw following the Minsk agreements but Kiev attacked. The “cyborgs” were driven out of the airport (your local media outlets took a week or so to tell you: here’s The Guardian saying the Kiev forces had re-taken the airport. They didn’t; cancel your subscription.) Another “cauldron” is forming and the neo-nazis are saying all is lost. What’s their answer: coup or götterdämmerung?

HOW TO READ THE WESTERN MEDIA. When they say Kiev forces have re-taken the airport, know that they have lost it. When they say giving up South Stream was a defeat for Putin, know it was a brilliant counter-move. When they say Russia is isolated (a stopped clock, here’s The Economist in 1999!), know that it is expanding its influence and connections every day. When they say Russians are turning against Putin, know that the opposite is true. When they speak of nation-building in the new Ukraine, know it’s degenerating into armed thuggery (see video). Know that when they speak of Kyrzbekistan, they’re not just stenographers, they’re incompetent stenographers. Take what they say, turn it upside down, and you’ll have a better take on reality.

THE MERKEL MYSTERY. I, like many, thought, when the Ukraine crisis began, that German Chancellor Merkel would prove to be key in settling it. This has not proved to be the case at all; in fact she often throws more fuel on the fire. I believe that Gilbert Doctorow may have the answer. In essence, he believes that Berlin dreams the “pre-WWI dream of Mitteleuropa” with cheap, docile workers in Poland, Ukraine and the others forever. Of course, it hasn’t worked out very well, but that, he thinks, was the plan. There was no “End of History” after all; a rebirth of history it seems.

THE WHEELS ARE COMING OFF THE BUS. A US official expressed concern that Russia and China were narrowing the military-technology gap. Threaten them and they come together; nothing is working out the way it was supposed to, is it? Do people in Washington ever wonder if they’re trying to juggle too many balls at once? And now Greece is throwing grit in the machinery.

DECLARATION OF WAR? The Ukrainian parliament just declared that Russia was an “aggressor state”. Is that a declaration of war? Can Russia now legally go in and stop the killing?

UKRAINE TODAY. Watch this video – your media outlets hide the insanity from you. But we don’t.

© Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Ottawa, Canada Websites: ROPV, US-Russia, Russia Insider

Airbrushing Embarrassments out of History: Writing Stalin and other non-Russians out of the picture

http://russia-insider.com/en/history/2015/01/26/2776

Original 27 May 2009 at http://www.russiaotherpointsofview.com/2009/05/airbrushing-history.html#more

I wrote this five or six years ago but I believe that it is just as appropriate now as it was then. Actually, it’s probably more appropriate because we hear such falsifications of history as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Germany in 1945 or that Auschwitz was liberated by Ukrainians.

There is a very strong interest in airbrushing history in those post Soviet countries founded on the myth that communism was imposed on them by Russians and none of their people had anything to do with it.

But they did: communism was not a Russian plot, it was truly international; communists were not only Russian, they came from all nationalities.

What follows is unchanged from what I wrote then; I have checked the hyperlinks.

Other countries could blame Russia for their lost decades; Russia, having no one to blame, couldn’t face its history” This piece of rhetorical puffery appeared about two years ago as an explanation for Russia’s alleged “de-democratization”. Not only does it ignore such things as the abortive trial of the CPSU in May 1992 and the Butovo Memorial, but it has a serious blind spot: the former communist countries have not come to terms with the fact that many of their people eagerly participated in the Bolshevik experiment and that they have a share of responsibility in the disaster. Bolshevism was not a purely “Russian” phenomenon.

A Latvian government commission has been working away to produce a monetary figure to put on the losses suffered by Latvia as a result of its incorporation into the USSR from 1940 to 1990. It has not finished its calculations yet, and may never, but the numbers that are bruited about are in the many billions. When it completes its work the final number will be as accurate or as inaccurate as such numbers will always be.

But it seems to be expected that, when the commission arrives at a number, Latvia will present a bill to the Russian Federation. But why should Russia be expected to pay? Bolshevism was not especially “Russian”. Determining ethnicity in a multi-national state like Russia is always somewhat a matter of opinion and Russian has two words to distinguish between ethnic Russians (русский “russkiy”) and citizens of the state (российский “rossiyskiy”). Thus, while all members of the Bolshevik Central Committee which plotted and executed the seizure of power in Petrograd in 1917 had been born into the Russian Empire, only two were ethnic Russians (Lenin and Bubnov); the remainder were Jews – certainly not considered “Russians” at the time – (Zinoviev, Kamenev-Rosenfeld, Sokolnikov-Brillyant, Trotskiy-Bronshteyn) and Lenin’s “miraculous Georgian”, Stalin-Jughashvili. But the true leadership can be gauged from Lenin’s famous “testament” of 24 December 1922 in which he criticises his likely successors: Stalin, Trotskiy, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Pyatakov and Bukharin – the last the only “Russian”. The leadership of the Bolshevik Party cannot be said to have been especially “Russian” and Volkogonov’s biography many times shows Lenin’s contempt for all things Russian. “Russians” alone did not make the Bolshevik Revolution; the Bolsheviks were, as they always claimed to be, “internationalists”.

Where did the Bolsheviks get the force that allowed them to seize power? The most reliable and potent military force that the Bolsheviks controlled was the Latvian Rifles: this force supplied the bayonets in the Petrograd coup and the dismissal of the Constituent Assembly. Without the power of these disciplined troops the Bolshevik coup might not have happened at all. The other force behind Bolshevik rule was the Cheka, the political police. Its first leader was the Pole Feliks Dzherzhinskiy-Dzierzynski and, when he briefly resigned after the assassination attempt on Lenin in 1918, his principal deputy, the Latvian Jekabs Peters-Peterss, served as head, ably assisted by another Latvian, Martins Latsis-Lacis.

So, given the essential role of Latvians in the coup itself and the creation of the Red Terror, perhaps Latvia should ask for compensation from itself.

The actual takeover of Latvia in 1940 was the decision of Stalin-Jughashvili (who ruled the USSR for nearly half its existence) assisted by his political police chief Lavrenti Beria (a Mingrelian or, in today’s parlance, another Georgian). This was hardly a “Russian” decision: as Donald Rayfield says in Stalin and his Hangmen (p 356): “In 1939 the whole of the USSR could be said to be controlled by Georgians and Mingrelians”.

Therefore, perhaps Latvia should apply to Georgia for compensation.

Or, perhaps, Russia should demand compensation from Latvia or Georgia. It is pointless to argue about which nationality suffered most but Russians also suffered greatly: as then-President Putin said at the Butovo memorial: “This is a particular tragedy for Russia because it took place on such a large scale. Those who were executed, sent to camps, shot and tortured number in the thousands and millions of people. Along with this, as a rule these were people with their own opinions. These were people who were not afraid to speak their mind. They were the most capable people. They are the pride of the nation.” The communists killed millions: they did not distinguish among nationalities: They were “internationalist” and their murders and their murderers were too. The fact that Beria was from Georgia did not prevent him from wiping out the Georgian intelligentsia. As Latsis said, perfectly defining the Red Terror: “The first question you must ask is: what class does he belong to, what education, upbringing, origin or profession does he have? These questions must determine the accused’s fate. This is the sense and essence of red terror”. There is nothing to suggest he excluded Latvians

Several of the post-communist states are engaged in an exercise of re-writing their history. Native communists and their involvement in Bolshevism are airbrushed out of the picture. Gone from the new picture are Latsis and Peters, Derzhinskiy and Orjonikidze; gone are Kossior and Zhdanov; Sultan-Galiyev, Narimanov and Vakhitov are airbrushed out; Vares and Snieckus are gone. In their place is erected a narrative of Russians imposing Russian-invented communism on innocent nations. Perhaps the most preposterous example of this reconstruction of reality was the proposal that the still-existing museum in Gori to its favourite son, Iosef Bissarion-dze Jughashvili, be re-named the museum of the Russian occupation of Georgia. Perhaps Russia should create a museum of the Georgian occupation of Russia: given the effect on Russian mortality of Stalin, Beria, Orjonikidze, Goglidze and Gvishiani, that would have more historical credibility. Some people in Ukraine want to paint the great famine of 1932-33 that killed so many Ukrainians as an act of Russian genocide. In fact the famine was caused by the drive to export wheat to obtain the capital to fuel Stalin’s ambitious industrialisation plans: the whole black earth zone of the USSR was targeted; people starved in the Kuban, as well as in Ukraine and Kazakhstan. It is simply otiose to say that because the Russian Federation assumed responsibility for the USSR’s debts, left-over troops, nuclear weapons and Security Council seat (to the approbation and relief of the West, be it understood), it also assumed responsibility for the doings of Stalin or Peters.

The view that Bolshevism and the USSR was “all-Russian” has persisted over some time, usually as an unstated background assumption in some piece about Moscow’s desire to re-occupy post-Soviet space. But it’s false history and false history is an impediment to reality.

As for one country claiming reparations from another, there is no one to present the bill to: those truly responsible are long dead, they were not products of their countries and all peoples of the USSR were equally ruined.

Why Should Moscow Trust Anything NATO Says?

http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/01/11/2328

NATO is always asking Russia to accept its word.

Concerned about missile defence establishments next door? Pshah! they’re there to deal with a “rogue state’s” as-yet-non-existent missiles, nothing to do with you. No you can’t come and look at them.

NATO walks out of the CFE Treaty, which Russia ratified but no one in NATO did; sure but Russia didn’t satisfy the extra conditions NATO tacked on to it.

NATO expansion right up to Russia’s door? Why, NATO is a force for stability – remember Tbilisi’s attack on South Ossetia in 2008? That kind of stability. Or, more recently, the stability, peace and prosperity that floods Ukraine.

NATO flights and exercises all around you? Nonsense, they’re peaceful and stabilising; it’s Russia aircraft that are the real destabilisers.

Are NATO members bombing people all over the place? Yes, but it’s for their own good.

Why don’t the Russian leaders just take NATO’s word for it? After all, NATO says it’s a trustworthy organisation and NATO is proud to tell Russia, and the rest of the world, “Our Alliance remains an essential source of stability in this unpredictable world”. So, how have we got into the position that Moscow does not accept NATO’s word of honour? The answer is very simple: experience has taught Russia that NATO’s word of honour isn’t worth anything: “empty words” indeed. Here are two examples of the evanescent character of NATO’s promises.

Moscow was promised in the Gorbachev years that NATO would not expand. How do I know that the promise was given? After all, nothing was written down. I know this because the US Ambassador of the period has said that the promise was made; I have been personally told by another NATO Ambassador of the period that the promise was made and “After speaking with many of those involved and examining previously classified British and German documents in detail, SPIEGEL has concluded that there was no doubt that the West did everything it could to give the Soviets the impression that NATO membership was out of the question for countries like Poland, Hungary or Czechoslovakia”. Here’s more evidence, from the magazine Foreign Affairs: “In the end, the United States overturned the system it promised to bring about.” So, never mind what sophists say about there being no piece of paper saying “We promise, signed, NATO”, Moscow was assured. And the promise was soon broken and broken again and broken again. At present NATO has 28 members: 12 of them – 40% – are former Warsaw Pact, Soviet allies or parts of the USSR itself. When NATO breaks a promise, it really breaks it.

And, one cynically has to ask, would it have made any difference if Gorbachev had got it in writing? NATO is perfectly capable of breaking, or severely stretching, a written agreement too. See below.

Let us move to a more recent test of NATO’s trustworthiness. A UNSC resolution authorised NATO states and others to create a no-fly zone over Libya for humanitarian reasons. In fairly short order this mutated into sustained destruction of Kaddafi’s forces and installations; then weapons were supplied to the rebels (so much for 13. “strict implementation of the arms embargo”) and special forces gave them training and directed the air attacks. In short, NATO aircraft swiftly became the rebels’ air force retaining only the hollowest pretence of the impartiality the Resolution implied. “We came. We saw. He died” as Hillary Clinton put it. Providing the rebel forces with an air force, weapons and special forces is very far from the UN Resolution that Moscow thought it was abstaining on. What was NATO’s word of honour worth in this case? And that ignores the consequences of the intervention. Not even the New York Times can pretend it’s anything other than a disaster (the days when NATO’s intervention was a “model intervention” are long gone. But thanks to the Internet’s memory, not forgotten).

So, given the Libya precedent and NATO Expansion, Moscow can be forgiven for thinking that, not only is NATO’s promise worth nothing, but, rather than bringing the stability it boasts about, it only destroys and moves on like some science fiction monster that lives to kill and kills to live.

Russia has no reason whatsoever to trust NATO’s mere assertion of intention. Here, from a Russian perception, are more examples of the worthlessness of NATO’s promises. But, really, the two examples of NATO Expansion and Libya, so important and so patent, are more than enough to show that NATO’s solemn declarations are subject to re-interpretation without warning. “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me,” NATO has fooled them more than once.

As George Kennan said, in 1998 of NATO Expansion: “I think it is the beginning of a new cold war… I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else.” Not for the first time, “Mr X” got it right.

RF Sitrep 20150108

RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 8 January 2015

NEW NWO. The Chinese foreign minister made it plain: “We believe that Russia has opportunities and knowledge to overcome the current problems in the economy. The Chinese-Russian relations of strategic partnership are at a high level, we are always supporting and helping our friend. If the Russian side needs it, we shall offer all possible support we may have”. Why is China doing this? Self-interest: if Washington can bring Russia down, China knows it’s next on the list. Meanwhile China is moving into Latin America. Washington and Brussels have united two powers that can crash their economies at will (at, admittedly, large – but not fatal – cost to themselves.)

TRUTH LEAKS OUT. Despite the best efforts of Western governments and their tame media, bits of truth are slowly – but not quickly enough – leaking out. The head of Stratfor described it as “the most blatant coup in history”. As to neo nazis (long pooh-poohed as a Putin fantasy – here, here and here for example), even the Washington Post admits “But now several of these units, especially those linked to oligarchs or the far right, are revealing a dark side.” Smaller publications can report more reality (Christianity Today or Salon) while the larger, like the NYT, still adhere to the Party Line. Here is a careful piece about neo-nazis and here a compendium on the subject. Read these and decide for yourself if this is a trivial phenomenon. Ignore the election result argument, these people prefer to create fear and compulsion: here, here, here, here. (What would the NYT or Economist say if there were a campaign for “real” Russian names, torchlight parades shouting “Glory to Russia” or guards at Christmas crèches to protect them from Obama?) Even the tame Western “human rights” organisations are starting to notice who’s shelling civilians. “Merkel should emphasize the need for Ukraine’s Defense Ministry to issue clear and specific orders… not to use certain explosive weapons in areas populated by civilians.” The notion that the defenders are destroying their own families’ housing is a little preposterous, isn’t it? Especially when Poroshenko thinks it desirable their children hide in basements. Everybody has a phone camera and a Web link now; hard to control the story.

MILITARY ETC. An amendment to Russia’s military doctrine states NATO expansion and its buildup on Russia’s borders is a threat: not really new, just that Moscow has stopped hinting. Meanwhile, as if to remind Washington – again – that Russia is not Libya or Afghanistan, a third SLBN was handed over to the Navy: these three boats carry 16 Bulava missiles each, each with 6 independently targetable warheads. 288 warheads in new, modern, tested systems. Then a land-based ICBM was successfully tested. We are informed that there are now 295,000 professional soldiers in the Armed Forces with the plan to add another 55,000 in 2015. Meanwhile, the heavy Angara A-5 rocket successfully launched a dummy payload. Russia kept its world-wide lead in space launches with 38.

DAY LATE AND A DOLLAR SHORT. Because we think it is important that Russia… and NATO are able to work together on important issues, like for instance, fighting terror.” Brilliant idea 15 years ago, good idea 10 years ago, OK idea 5 years ago, today, too late: you can’t call Russia an aggressor and ask for cooperation in one and the same statement.

CHECHNYA. Take ten minutes to watch this. A lot of things are happening you’re not told about.

EURASIAN ECONOMIC UNION. First suggested ten years ago by Nazarbayev, it took effect on 1 January. Comprising Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Armenia (joined the next day) it is a free trade zone. We will see how effective it proves to be, born as it is in difficult times. Russia cheekily suggest the EU join: “You really think it is wise to put so much political energy into a free trade agreement with the United States when one has a much more natural trade partner next door right in the neighborhood? At least we don’t treat our chickens with chlorine”.

UKRAINIAN NUCLEAR POWER STATION. Something is happening at the Zaporizhia nuclear power station. There have been some shutdownsmore than one, it seems. Rebel sources say radiation levels have spiked. There may be a connection with nuclear fuel from Westinghouse; dangerous says Moscow. This could be quite serious and there is no reason to believe anything Kiev says about it.

© Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Ottawa, Canada Websites: ROPV, US-Russia, Russia Insider