- The situation outside Crimea is rapidly deteriorating. Yesterday, a SWAT team of the Ukrainian SBU has arrested the “popular governor” of the Donetsk region. He whereabouts are unknown. The local police has also arrested an unknown number of anti-insurgent demonstrators.
- Arrests of protesters have also happened in other cities of the Ukraine, including Odessa. To my knowledge there are no signs of police forces siding with the anti-insurgent forces anywhere outside Crimea.
- I have been parsing the pro-insurgency websites and newschannels and they regularly report about Ukrainian units in Crimea which did not recognize the Crimean authorities and which remain loyal to the insurgency. These sources claim that these units have even kept their weapons. Some sources speak of 11 Ukrainian units, all surrounded by Russian forces.
- The Russian blogosphere is awash with various reports all corroborating what what pretty clear from day 1: the mysterious armed units which appeared overnight in Crimea are, indeed, Spetsnaz GRU. They seem to be supported by Air-Assault and Airborne units. Russian Mi-24 attack helicopters are also regularly seen.
- The insurgents also seem to be in control of the Russian-Ukrainian border were they are constantly subjecting Russian citizens to intense searches, harassment and where many are simply turned back.
- The Ukrainian SBU is threatening to arrest the ex-governor of Kharkov, Mikhail Dobkin, who resigned to run for president, on charges of plotting to overthrow the regime by force. He is also being investigated for threatening the territorial integrity of the Ukraine. So much for him running in the next elections.
I would like to address three aspects of the West’s response to the situation in the Ukraine:
First, the use of billionaire oligarchs: I think that is a brilliant move. While the West does not have enough money to bail out the Ukraine, it does have enough money to assist the billionaire oligarchs to buy-off the local police and security forces. Think of it, you are a riot cop or a SBU agent, and the Kiev appointed governor offers to put you on a $5’000 a month salary to remain loyal to the insurgency. That is when an average salary would be in the $200-$400 dollars a month. What would you do?
Also, make no mistake about it, all these oligarchs are ruthless mobsters and like any mobsters they have their own enforcers and hired thugs whom they can use to suppress a crowd (as this was done in Moscow in 1993 when armed thugs hired by the mayor of Moscow, Luzhkov – who was also a mobster – shot and killed many pro-Parliament supporters.
This tells me that unless the Russian-speaking population is willing to generate enough violent resistance to actually overcome these police and security forces the oligarchs might well prevail.
Second, all the talk about NATO ships entering the Black Sea. Yes, that could be linked to the situation in the Ukraine but no, this is not a direct threat for Russia. These ships can “show the flag” – a very important Navy mission. They can also collect intelligence on the Russians. And they can show support for the insurgency. But in terms of military threat, the Black Sea is a lake by US Navy standards, which is waaaaaaay to close to the Russian Federation and its airpower and therefore not a place the USN would pick to attack Russia. People often assume that the main threat to a navy is another navy. This is not so, the worst threat for a navy is the other guy’s airpower and any US ship in the Black Sea would have a zero chance of survival against the Russian air force, especially without a good air cover of its own. At this point in time, the US and NATO are not ready to commit enough airpower to engage in combat air patrols, nevermind a full scale war, over the Black Sea. In fact, the US has much better options to attack Russian forces in Crimea than sending ships into the Black Sea. Bottom line: these USN ship are not a military threat to anybody.
Third, the US/NATO missile shield. Some have speculated that the US/NATO anti-missile shield being currently developed and deployed in eastern Europe could offer a protective umbrella under which NATO could attack or threaten to attack. Yes, this was the plan but no, this will not work. At this point in time the system is not really operational. Furthermore, Russia has the means to destroy it very rapidly (using Iskander missiles and Spetsnaz forces). Finally, this system is designed to intercept older generation missiles and not the advanced types currently being fielded in Russia.
Even though I am by nature a pessimist, I see no signs of the US or NATO gearing up for war against Russia. And, indeed, why should they when for a tiny fraction of the price and at zero risk they can simply buy off the security forces in the regions which oppose the insurgency? And in the unlikely scenario that Russia would use military force outside Crimea, nobody at SHAPE is going to go to war over Lugansk, Donetsk or Kharkov. Yes, they are every bit as evil has Hitler was but, no, they don’t have his courage.
Stay tuned.
The Saker
Will the Ukraine armed forces attempt to take back Crimea by force? That is the most important, perhaps the only question.
Hi Saker,
If Russia is really interested in detaching the eastern provinces…but does not want to actually invade…would it not be appropriate for Russian intelligence services to send a message to the local police chiefs, and perhaps the oligarch governors?
Something along the lines of: “we are holding you responsible for the safety or protesters and if any of them are killed or tortured or imprisoned for too long, something very bad could happen to you.”
This would all be under cover and deniable and I suspect would very much counter the power of the oligarchs and the coup government’s strategy.
OTOH, perhaps Russia has decided that Crimea is the only part they really care about.
I’ve read these days that the russian missiles have learnt how to avoid shields. Cannot find the link, sorry, but anyone interested can do a search.
@Anonymous:Will the Ukraine armed forces attempt to take back Crimea by force?
I honestly doubt that very much. Not to add to their already semi-mystical reputation, but these Spetsnaz forces are really formidable and they simply do no surrender under any circumstances. Furthermore, they can count on the support of the entire Russian military. Finally, Crimea is much easier to defend than to invade. No, I honestly cannot imagine anybody seriously considering it, especially a regime with a totally dysfunctional military.
@Lysander:If Russia is really interested in detaching the eastern provinces…but does not want to actually invade…would it not be appropriate for Russian intelligence services to send a message to the local police chiefs, and perhaps the oligarch governors
Hi my friend, good to “see” you again! To answer your question, as long as the oligarchs and the local cops feel protected by the US and NATO Russian threats will probably be ignored. Of course, Russia could mount a terror campaign, but that would be totally illegal and would make Russia do exactly what it blames the USA for doing. No, I think that Russia should not do that. That is what the LOCAL RUSSIAN-SPEAKERS should do. It’s like Syria or South Ossetia: Russia will only help those who first help themselves. I think that this is a very smart policy.
@Anonymous:I’ve read these days that the russian missiles have learnt how to avoid shields.
Correct. Both Russian tactical missiles (Iskander) or strategic (Topol-M) have the ability to avoid these so-called “shields”.
Cheers,
The Saker
Here’s another pro-Russian site:
Da Russophile
One of it’s commentators points out that American forces in Afghanistan are somewhat reliant on a supply route through Russia, so American sanctions against Russia could have side effects in Afghanistan.
Remember how America supported the Taliban against Russia in Afghanistan? Maybe Russia can return the compliment by supporting the same people!
It is grossly unfair to compare Syria to the Eastern Ukraine. Syria had a functioning government, one that had been preparing for a major war for decades. Anyway, a terror campaign by citizens who probably have few guns and explosives is just going to be used to justify the coming clampdown.
Any other ideas? After all, Lenin and company didn’t just appear with no money. For that matter, what can Russia and hopefully China together do that go on the offensive?
Paul
I think Kosovo would support Crimea.
Very well said Saker, Russia should be different. Virtue will pay off in the long run.
That said, I kind of wish Putin had not ended maneuvers by the Ukie border. It would have made the coup government much more nervous about attacking eastern Russians.
Outside of Crimea, how important are the south eastern provinces to Russia? Also, remember, once Crimea leaves the western Ukrainians will win every election, even without cheating, as it seemed like a near 50-50 split right now.
Also, possibly behind the scenes the west may be willing to accept a defacto Crimean anexation so long as Russia promises not to take whole east.
That’s just a guess.
@Paul:It is grossly unfair to compare Syria to the Eastern Ukraine.
You are right, I agree. I could then maybe compare to the Bosnian-Serbs instead, but those were not help by the Eltsin regime. But yes, Syria did have a functioning state. I guess I was referring not to the state, but to the personal courage and determination of the Syrians. But you are right, good point!
Cheers,
The Saker
“…what can Russia and hopefully China together do that go on the offensive?”
I dare say neither Russia nor China are warmongers. And their leaders know that Wall Street and the zios masters desperately need a big conflict to save their finantial system and drag EU to the abysm
The ultimate fate of the border regions will be decided by the attraction of Russia vs the attraction of the Ukraine. Putin is playing the long game here. The West will get distracted by the next shiny object and the Ukrainian revolutionary government will have to answer for its track record. At that time, the border regions will pass over to the Russian Federation.
5,000 dollar bribes won’t stop that.
@Anonymous:I think Kosovo would support Crimea.
LOL! You are quite right, now let’s see if that happens or not :-)
@Lysander:That’s just a guess.
I can only marvel at the sharpness and refine logic of what you call “guesses”! Yes, you are correct, Crimea leaving will probably tip the balance in the rest of the Ukraine. However, it will also provide a contagious model for other region and remember that time is NOT on the side of the insurgents as the bankrupt Ukraine is heading for default and that as soon as the shortages become acute, so will the rage: being poor and destitute and standing in long lines or basic necessities while Russia is awash with money will be very very painful for the Ukies.
As for the Russians moving into eastern Ukraine, I think that this would be overkill. First, as I said, the LOCALS need to take a firm stance. Only THEN can Russia help. Also, what Putin said is “if the locals are brutally repressed we will intervene”. He de-facto put a safety net under the locals for them to act, but THEY need to act now and not wait for more.
And yes, you are right again, Russia does not “need” the rest of the Ukraine, this is not about resources, its about protecting the Russian-speaking population. But if, say, Kharkov does follow the example of Crimea, then Russia will protect it, no doubt in my mind at all.
As for would the West trade Crimea for the rest? They are all denying it and they want it all. But that is bull. They better agree to that if Putin offers it, but my sense is that he will not offer such a deal until or unless he becomes certain that the Russian-speakers in the eastern Ukraine are not capable of resisting locally in a determined fashion, which is by no means sure. I think that the eastern Ukraine might still explode in popular anger against the insurgency.
Kind regards,
The Saker
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTHxOXfOq2Y Maidan – Not shown on TV. video One.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFqDAY64h3U Maidan – Not shown on TV. video Two.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umPBNWxpdBQ Shot in the back – An inconvenient truth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOQA6GhjQVc Ashton – Paet, la telefonata intercettata.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1KQP-hZoYM Estonian Foreign Ministry confirms authenticity of Ashton – Paet conversation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_84lrb7Vpo After Yugoslavia, Ukraine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5qXS8Xc274 Неудобная правда о майдане 2 Разбор стрельбы по безоружным
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdDYyWrf0XM Майдан ОБУЧЕНИЕ на базе НАТО в Эстонии
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDIagUzB20A Ультрас «Днепра» опустили продажных милиционеров на всю страну
I think that Putin is making the right moves. But why isn’t Yanukovich making anymore noise?
He’s still the president of Ukraine, right?
Fernando
Interesting article which speculates on 3 different scenarios of how this conflict can proceed. It’s in Russian, but easily enough understood with an auto translator.
Три дороги на Киев (Three roads to Kiev)
http://www.vz.ru/politics/2014/3/6/675940.html
вот так
@Anonymous: “I’ve read these days that the russian missiles have learnt how to avoid shields.”
Russian missiles don’t have to avoid shields.
These missile shields against ICBMs are just propaganda. They don’t work.
Hi Saker. From the times you are active I assume you are in the US or Canada.
Hi Saker,
I think you made a typographical error in your article. You wrote, “Even though I am by nature an optimist[.]” I think you meant “by nature a pessimist.”
Regards,
Abraham
@Fernando: He’s still the president of Ukraine, right
Yes, but he only useful to make a legal case. Nobody wants to listen to him any more.
@anonymousThese missile shields against ICBMs are just propaganda. They don’t work.
True, but they probably will in the future, hence the Russian deployment of missiles capable of avoiding that so-called “shield”.
@anonymous:Hi Saker. From the times you are active I assume you are in the US or Canada.
Correct. I am in sunny Florida :-)
Cheers,
The Saker
@Abraham:I think you made a typographical error in your article.
Sure did! Thanks, I corrected it.
Cheers,
The Saker
Can Kiev shut down the important businesses in the Eastern Ukraine? Try to drive refugees into Russia?
The point about going on the offensive is not about war. It could be economic or even just cutting off some supply lines that the enemy needs. But judo is required, too.
The article from BOT TAK was interesting, but is it really possible for the US to implement the earlier agreement now? Can an opposition politician go to Kiev safely? Besides, what is to stop the Syrian scenario to the extend possible? Go to areas where you can shoot both sides. Stir things up. The US is good at that.
Paul
The wife of Paul Gubarev, the “popular governor” of the Donetsk region kidnapped by the insurgency, is saying she has confirmation he is being held in Kiev.
https://twitter.com/pgubarev
вот так
“Here’s a little known fact: the Hungarian uprising of 1956 was an anti-Jewish pogrom.”
What rubbish. The communists are a Jewish organization.
Stalin, Lenin, Trotsky, Beria, Kaganovich were all Jews.
If fact, Stalin’s name იოსებ ჯუღაშვილი is a very slight misspelling of იოსებ ჯუდაშვილი which means Joseph son of Judah.
Saker, I’ve read all your “analyses”. The last one ’bout oligarchs’ militia as well.
The same topic was main part of Mr Paul Crag Roberts’ The Looting Of Ukraine Has Begun
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/03/06/looting-ukraine-begun/
Does this mean the Russians lost her clout?
Once the proverbial Russian Bear roared and everyone went searching for cover. Now, they know Mr Putin is on the defensive. He waits, he’s not pushing ahead. He is cornered.
The second question. How many Russian citizens of Ukraine hell should be killed before Russian Forces intervene in the killings?
Would you like to be one of the first “heroes” to be killed by oligarchs’ thugs only to give Mr Putin “pretext” for direct armed involvement with Ukrainian fascists?
Mr Putin said during his meeting with journalists the following words (from official presidential transcript):
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Listen carefully. I want you to understand me clearly: if we make that decision, it will only be to protect Ukrainian citizens. And let’s see those troops try to shoot their own people, with us behind them – not in the front, but behind. Let them just try to shoot at women and children! I would like to see those who would give that order in Ukraine.
Does the troops have to be Ukrainian soldiers? Oligarchs’ thugs are not enough? Banderovtsy are not enough?
Once more about your remark on (Ukrainian) “brilliant move”. What move on the Russian side would trump the de facto “Ukrainian death squads”?
Regards
Just to make things explicit; Stalin’s (usual but false) name იოსებ ჯუღაშვილი is a very slight misspelling of (his true name) იოსებ ჯუდაშვილი which means Joseph son of Judah.
Might be a litlle bit off topic, but can anyone explain why is the US/NATO missile shield in Europe such a big thing? Even if we assume that it is in perfect working order and is capable of shooting down russian IBCM’s, agan, why is it such a big deal?!
According to my (humble) knowledge on the topic, the Russians are also capable of destroying US ICBM’s, at least those ones targeting Moscow. They also have radars, both on land and in space, who can detect the IBCM’s and also have advanced guided missile systems who can shoot them down before they reach their target.
Also, the MS won’t be something that the US doesn’t already have, that is to say they already have radars and guided missile systems who can detect and destroy russian IBCM’s. The only difference is that they are stationed in North America, not in Europe.
So please, can anyone shed some light on the topic? :)
Just to make things explicit; Stalin’s (usual but false) name იოსებ ჯუღაშვილი is a very slight misspelling of (his true name) იოსებ ჯუდაშვილი which means Joseph son of Judah.
იაკობ = Joseph.
Stalin’s usual but false name:
შვილი = son of.
ჯუღა is not a word or name in the Georgian language.
Hence, ჯუღაშვილი means: son of ????
Hence, ჯუღაშვილი is a nonsense word.
Stalin’s true name:
შვილი = son of.
ჯუდა = Judah.
Hence, ჯუდაშვილი means: son of Judah.
As for the ships in the Black Sea……..
I would be concerned more about a false flag attack on the US guided-missile destroyer USS Truxton. The current regime and their backers seem to be increasingly desperate to ratchet up the tension. Perhaps the speed up in the referendum date in the Crimea takes into consideration that these type of actions are increasingly likely so facts on the ground may become more important.
I don’t see how this could be spun to be credible. The western media seems to believe in the tooth fairy lately so my thoughts on credibility may be moot.
Would Ukraine have the audacity to join EU, accept the money BEFORE an election, bypassing the will of the people?
@Anonymous:Would Ukraine have the audacity to join EU, accept the money BEFORE an election, bypassing the will of the people?
Well, nobody has invited the Ukraine to join the EU, that is not even a remote possibility. All they offered the Ukraine was to become a market for EU goods through a so-called “association agreement”.
As for the insurgent leaders, they will accept anything, sign anything, say anything and they don’t give a rat’s ass about the Ukrainian people. If tomorrow their US bosses tell them to become Zen Buddhist monks and join Paraguay and Vanuatu in a union, and begin to speak Swahili – they will immediately comply.
Make no mistake – this is a 100% bought regime, totally under US control.
Besides, right now they barely control some cities, the rest of the country is in complete chaos.
Cheers and kind regards,
The Saker
@Anonymous Boldfaced Person –
Please stop spamming this wonderful blog.
To the extent that you’re making valid contributions you’re nullifying them by repeating them, typing them in bold-face, and posting them in unrelated discussions.
I have to confess I worry sometimes that people like you might actually be Hasbara agents masquerading as raving bigots, looking to stir the pot.
At the present time, it’s hard to determine whether we are in the midst of a Cuban Missile Crisis or not. Nevertheless, I looked up documentary films on this subject on YouTube. This one seems to relatively fairly portray it. It’s worth watching to see how quickly escalation can happen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMYumVM1rZM
While this film did mention that Russian forces had short-range, battlefield, tactical nuclear weapons, it didn’t mention that (likely because it wasn’t known at the time) a Soviet submarine carried nuclear tipped torpedoes. Since communications between the Kremlin and naval fleet was poor, one such submarine had to vote as to whether they would launch one of these torpedoes on Florida. It was Soviet military policy that a vote must be taken between the captain and his two senior officers to launch a nuclear weapon. The senior officers voted: one to attack and one not to attack. The captain held the deciding vote, which was not to attack. Thus, by one vote did the world escape an all-out nuclear war.
I am old enough to remember this event. CBS news hired its own aircraft, and flew over the situation off the coast of Florida, filming it and reporting what they saw live. Apparently, this was a first. If I remember the reporter’s name correctly, it was Eric Sevareid that said, “We were just eyeball to eyeball, and the other guy just blinked.” This was after the ships that were stopped, turned around and returned to Russia. Later, it came out that during the secret Kennedy/Khrushchev communications, Kennedy told Khrushchev, referring to the generals at the Pentagon, “I don’t think I can control these guys.” I doubt the situation in the Pentagon is any different today.
During this period, three films were made, warning films about how dangerous this period was, especially the generals in the Pentagon: “Seven Days in May,” where a general organizes a coup d’etat, but at the last minute, he’s stopped; “Failsafe,” where a false indication of a Soviet attack causes a retaliatory strike, which the American president can’t stop; and Stanley Kubrick’s classic film, “Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb.” This New Yorker article explains how accurate this film really was. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2014/01/strangelove-for-real.html
There is a strong correlation between the Balkan Wars of the ’80s and the Ukraine, with regards to a hidden dimension—a personal conflict that must be resolved among a certain portion of the people. As far as I can see it, and Sakar can correct me if I’m wrong, like Yugoslavia, there are three distinct groups: Muslim Tatars, Western Ukrainians (They could be Catholic or Orthodox), and Eastern Russian speaking citizens. During the Balkan Wars of the ’80s,, there was the real issue of “mixed marriages”: marriages between Croats and Serbs. The Croats identified with Western Europeans and 90% of which are Catholic; while the Serbs were clearly identified with their brother and sister Slavs, the Russians, and the Eastern Orthodox Church. The dilemma must be the same for these Ukrainians: which side do they choose, go with the Russian speaking side, or chose the Nationalist side? The Serb film “Vukovar” is a good example of how this played out during this war. This is available in the U.S. with English subtitles. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111646/
“Before the Rain” shows how, during wartime in the Balkans, intense tensions between groups can erupt into micro wars on a local level. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110882/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl This kind of issue is clearly likely in the Ukraine, now and in the future.
I assume the problem with missiles at your border is about the speed of interception. I think even the fastest anti missile need some kind of time to prepare a nice interception (and be ready to receive a nuke on their head in case they fail).
Specially if you have ZUSA at your door.
“@Anonymous:I think Kosovo would support Crimea.
LOL! You are quite right, now let’s see if that happens or not”
Hy Saker, my comment is cum grano salis.
The irony is if the empire go to war with Serbia to “protect” the “sel-determination” of the etnic minority of kosovar-albanian than the same must be apply to the russian minorities in Crimea for self-determination.
Unfortunately, when i put this ironic comment on a BBC article they censored it.
@Randall – On the Cuban Missile Crisis issue. Superpower relations have been near Cuban Crisis levels from August 2013.
The Empire strikes back, not in revenge for Russian plans to abandon the dollar, but for the nuclear confrontation in the Eastern Mediterranean on August 31, 2013. Here is what happened:
Putin’s orders to the fleet:
– Sink any NATO ship involved in illegal aggression against Syria.
– You have the authority to use tactical nuclear weapons in self-defense.
Throughout the year the fleet – with these orders – had prevented a Libya-style air war from US carriers. In August, after first launching the Ghouta CW false flag attack, Obama decided to try “war of aggression lite” by firing his Tomahawks from 1000 km away.
Who canceled the strike? Most likely the attack order was given, but the admirals reported back that they CANNOT fulfill this direct order, as they are “unable to maneuver into a safe firing position.” Obama got really, really mad.
You are quite wrong in your analysis, while i agree current west is under Jewish control,Hitler was the only man who could save europe by destroying jewish bolsheviks …
I think its right thing for hitler to invade russia and destroy bolshevik jews and rest of jews, nothing wrong with that…
Currently Russia seems to be going through same historic recourse that germany went through..
Ethnic germans was killed in mass numbers by Polish jewish bolsheviks in Danzig massacres which led to hitler invading poland…likewise Ethnic russians are at receiving end in ukraine and erstwhile russian territories are under seize or under constant attack
The only way out of this crisis, is very simple,Destroy Jewish Ghetto nation ISRAEL, and rest of the kikes must be hunted down, first settle down jewish question, then we Gentiles will settle our issues amicably
As long as jewish question is not answered , world will continue to bleed
Nuland is Actually a Jew, her husband kagan is another Jew, All wars are Jewish Harvests
Gentile races are so stupid to tolerate Jewish pests
Saker,
re:@Anonymous:I think Kosovo would support Crimea.
Why would Albanian Kosovars (Albania – referred to by a former US Ambassador as “a pimple on the asshole of the world” support any Christian state? It might take energy away from their smuggling of drugs, body parts, women, arms etc.
Tq
“I think its right thing for hitler to invade russia”
No. Hitler, like Stalin, was a Jew.
@Nuland,
Pepe Escobar conveyed the description made by a reader of AOT which captures in a nutshell the real situation in Ukraine: “The Khaganate of Nulands”!!! It is absolutely genial. It’s the language of Alcofribas Nasier (and Boby Lapointe, pour les connaisseurs)!
Have fun,
WizOz
It seems that the Cossacks are acting like complete idiots. They are roughing up journalists and in general degrading situations around military bases in Crimea. Interestingly, in the Vice documentary Ukrainian and Russian military personnel were seen talking trash about the Cossacks with each other. The self-defense units have also been acting dishonorably.
What are your thoughts on this?
Regards,
C
Hello Saker,
One more thing. I came across this interesting write-up by a young Ukrainian living in Kiev where he describes the background to the situation today, particularly concerning the mafia-style governance Ukraine has faced. Although he is against Russian intervention, it helped me gain great perspective on the issue.
http://www.reddit.com/r/self/comments/1znh5e/ukraine_how_and_why_we_ended_up_here_all_the/
It’s a bit lengthy, but I would appreciate your input on his views.
C
@the use of billionaire oligarchs’
They are the still “free” part of the “Russian Mafyia”. They want to play the Berezovskys and Khodorkovskys. It is likely (it is a suggestion) that some of them were in the cross-hairs of possible corruption investigations. From NYT: “Fearing arrest, Mr. Korban and Mr. Filatov fled Ukraine for Israel last week. A Dnepropetrovsk judge ordered on Jan. 29 that Mr. Korban be detained and interrogated as a witness in connection with a previously dormant investigation of a 2012 murder”.
Wikipedia: “Oleksandr Turchynov, former Prime Minister of Ukraine (and current “president”), went to court for allegedly destroying files pertaining to Mogilevich. Mogilevich is believed to have ordered many assassinations of his enemies across the world, including both shootings and car-bombs”.
WizOz
Saker, don’t get me wrong, I love your blog and follow you almost every day, but your continual parroting of tired mainstream propaganda cliches about Hitler does get old after a while. You might as well say Putin is as “evil” as Hitler as both men were vilified by the Western press for precisely the same reason.
@Anonymous:your continual parroting of tired mainstream propaganda cliches about Hitler
Well, I am so sorry if I sound like I am parroting the mainstream media, but it just happens that I loathe Hitler for my own reasons: I consider him a nasty, arrogant, ignorant, megalomaniac, pagan racist SOB. I personally have known MANY people who suffered horrors at the hands of the Nazis, and I have absolutely *zero* sympathy for him or his followers. To me, Hitler is the ultimate expression of the West arrogance, imperialism and brutality. And if you think I speak of ignorance or under influence of the corporate media, you are quite mistaken. I have read Mein Kampf, I have read Goebbels, Streicher and Evola. I personally met plenty of Nazis, both in Argentina and elsewhere. And I have read most of the best known revisionists and negationists. I personally met some and had long talks with them. I read Mussolini too, by the way. I know National-Socialism well enough to have the right to loathe it without being the object of sophomoric accusations or parroting.
As for the mainstream media – it also says that the earth is round and that 2+2=4. As they say, a broken watch is right once every 12 hours. Just to say the opposite of the media on principle is infantile.
Now go goose-stepping around the living room while singing the Horst Wessel Lied and let the rest of us have an intelligent conversation, ok?
Most sincerely,
The Saker
don’t wish to rain on this parade of tactical-political speculations, but the entire equation changed today. The Heavy Dancer has arrived. Brzezinski – who some of us suspected, but only suspected of being involved – gave an interview to the BBC today. Offered Putin a crass deal: Russia takes Crimea, EU (less NATO, he sez) gets the rest of the Ukraine. Putin – who having read Zbig’s books knows that the globalists’ ultimate goal is the dismemberment of Russia itself – will not bite. He’ll give the fascisti in Kiev enough rope to hang themselves, then send in the troops and tanks. But I don’t think Brzezinski, who now controls EU & American policy, will back down either. People might want to stock up on iodine pills.
@C:It seems that the Cossacks are acting like complete idiots.
You are right. And that is because the real Cossacks were pretty much exterminated by the Bolsheviks. Nowadays 95% of so-called “Cossacks” are wannabe, clowns, idiots and retards. They wear opera uniforms, fake medals, invented ranks, etc. Now, the few real Cossacks which still exist, and they still do, don’t spend their time running around and act like schoolyard bullies. Some are in the military, and some in volunteer forces, and they don’t get noticed by the media. Only the clowns do. So don’t take this masquerading pretend-Cossacks too seriously, its just post-Soviet social pathology. This too shall pass :-)
Cheers,
The Saker
@Cossacks,
There are few even in Oz!
Cossack-Australian revival under way | Russia Beyond The Headlines.
rbth.asia/…/australian_cossacks_seek_to_revive_pre-1917_48743.html
Sep 10, 2013 – Led by a young ataman (or chairman), Simeon Boikov, this Australian association describes itself as a cultural and historical organisation.
WizOz
The entry of a US destroyer (or two) into the Black Sea reminds me of the Gulf of Tonkin ‘incident’ in 1964. According to one interpretation (disputed) Lyndon Johnson sent the destroyer USS Maddox to the vicinity of the North Vietnamese coast as a provocation. One thing led to another and a battle ensued between the destroyer and a number of NV torpedo boats. This incident was used to get the US Congress to pass a resolution authorizing the US (in effect) to wage war on NV.
Could the purpose of this destroyer’s entry into the Black Sea be a similar provocation, with the intent of inducing a similar ‘incident’, leading to a congressional resolution authorizing the US to “assist” any European country whose government was considered to be jeopardized by “intervention”?
Henry Kissinger is talking sense and suggesting a Finland model for Ukraine: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html
/Hagen
Saker, you might want to take some time when this crisis is over to take a look at “Hitler’s Table Talk: Troubling Finds” by Richard C Carrier of Columbia University. You will be surprised to learn what Hitler’s actual religious beliefs were. Here is a link where you can read it: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1432747?uid=3738256&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21103506360461
The Novel that Predicts Russia’s Invasion of Crimea
This is pretty interesting. This is the opening paragraph.
[“Who wouldn’t recognize, amid the crazed architectural flourishes of Downtown Simferopol, the assertive skyscraping simplicity of the pencil-like home of the Russian Courier.” Thus begins one of my favorite novels of the twentieth century. The same novel ends with Russia annexing Crimea after its citizens are snookered into requesting the invasion themselves: in other words, it eerily anticipates this week’s news.]
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2014/03/the-great-1979-novel-that-predicts-russias-crimea-invasion.html
I can’t help but think of the novel written in 1898 that predicted the sinking of the Titanic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futility,_or_the_Wreck_of_the_Titan
Fade up Twilight Zone music.
P1/3. “Russia has the means to destroy it very rapidly (using Iskander missiles and Spetsnaz forces).”
I respect your beliefs however it is important to recognise that U.S./NATO anti-missile architecture can only achieve a survivable first strike situation (nuclear primacy) if employed after a pre-emptive debilitating first strike. The response you suggest may be compromised by such an event.
[quote] Two critics from the RAND think tank, David Gompert and Terrence Kelly, described AirSea Battle last August in the following terms: “US forces would launch physical attacks and cyberattacks against the enemy’s ‘kill-chain’ of sensors and weaponry in order to disrupt its command-and-control systems, wreck its launch platforms (including aircraft, ships and missile sites) and finally defeat the weapons they actually fire. The sooner the kill-chain is broken, the less damage US forces would suffer, and the more damage they will be able to inflict on the enemy.”
Gompert and Kelly noted that Chinese military planning would take into account that the US twice launched pre-emptive air assaults on Iraq, in 1991 and 2003, to wipe out its command-and-control and limited air defence systems. The very conception of destroying China’s defensive network before it could retaliate, they commented, meant that “with the advent of AirSea Battle, there is the danger that the US and China are both moving toward military postures and embracing operating concepts—if not war-fighting plans—that create spiralling incentives to act first.”
In other words, a clash last November between US and Chinese aircraft in the ADIZ could have prompted either side to launch a full-scale military response before the other did—up to the point of a desperate Beijing regime deciding to use its nuclear arsenal before it was wiped out by US strikes…… Hammes proposed in 2012 that the US repudiate direct attacks on targets located on the Chinese mainland and focus instead on preparing for an economic blockade of China, which is included within AirSea Battle but only as a secondary aspect.
Offshore Control, he wrote, “seeks termination of the conflict on US terms through China’s economic exhaustion without damage to mainland China’s infrastructure or the rapid escalation of the conflict” … “It recognises the fact that the concept of decisive victory against a nation with a major nuclear arsenal is fraught with risks, if not entirely obsolete.”
P2/3. Hammes advocated that the US military instead “cripple China’s export trade, which is essential to China’s economy.”……Hammes’s central assumption was that the Chinese ruling elite would not retaliate with its nuclear arsenal against US and Australian attempts to destroy the country’s economy because “no-one can win a major nuclear exchange.”
Such an assumption is unjustifiable. US imperialism has attempted to economically strangle a rival before, provoking a full-scale war in which every weapon available was used. In June 1941, the US placed an oil embargo on Japan, demanding that it withdraw its forces from China and French Indo-China. The Japanese ruling elite, confronting the prospect of economic collapse and unprepared to accept US terms, responded with the attack on Pearl Harbour and the invasion of South East Asia to try to gain a quick strategic advantage. The Pacific war was marked by savagery on both sides and ended with the US dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Today, there are simply no grounds for assuming that a blockade of China would not trigger acts by the besieged Beijing regime that would lead to all-out war, including the use of nuclear weapons by both sides. [end] (US analysts debate plans for war against China, By James Cogan, 10 February 2014) http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/10/offs-f10.html
There are many who believe that nuclear weapons will never be employed however they overlook the fact that atomic warfare was an aspect of WW2. The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki shows the U.S. has already resorted to atomic warfare. Operational plans are being developed to enhance first strike capabilities against both China and Russia. However both Russia and China will no doubt respond with counteractions.
P3/3. Furthermore, many do not recognise that although wars are often planned, wars can occur when they are not. Just as no nation wanted the first world war or the second world war, similarly, a third global conflagration will likely be unplanned. Indeed, some such as myself believe this conflagration is already gradually unfolding before us, evident through the successive wars and globally expanding militarism of another military bloc.
“World War III will be of coalitional nature. Countries will form coalitions based on their loyalty to one of the two models of world order. The first model is ‘the world of civilized hierarchy’. Select few brutally exploit the rest of humanity. The second model is ‘civilized mutual support’ or ‘civilized harmony’…….In a few years, the third stage will commence, the stage of ‘limited wars’, that will later turn into a full scale world war with all types of weapons. The only restricting factor at the moment is Russia’s nuclear potential . According to the forecast of the scientist, the West will try to take away Russia’s nuclear shield.” (World War III Has Already Begun, 25/03/2010)
“It will probably soon be possible for the United States to destroy the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia or China with a first strike.” (The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy, Keir A. Lieber/Daryl G. Press, Mar/Apr 2006).
The U.S. and NATO are developing architecture that seeks to overcome mutually assured destruction however the belief in a survivable first strike scenario significantly increases the probability of such a military strike being employed in the event of conflict.
Unfortunately, man’s capacity for mass destruction has developed in advance of his behaviour. The militarism of another military bloc is expanding. This militarism is unlikely to cease. Many wars of lower intensity are globally expanding and far larger conflagrations are approaching. The eventual outcome is therefore both logical and largely predictable. It is prudent that Russia (and China) be prepared.
More than Tonkin, we must now “Remember the Maine”, which exploded in Havana Harbour in 1898 and began the Spanish-American War. Like Tonkin, it was an accident used for nefarious purposes. This time, we could very well scuttle it deliberately.
Dei Iudicium –
The West could have very well done a first-strike attack in the late 1990’s on Russia but it was too busy/distracted with the rape and it had every reason to think that it would continue to have its way.
Putin and the forces behind him moved in fast enough to stop the pillaging and rebuild enough military power to take away the first strike option. The American wet dream of an effective anti-missile defense against Russia is now less likely than ever.
The anti-missile efforts we see today may be meant to unnerve politicians in the East and embolden those in the West but little more than that. Personally I think their efforts are wasted. They could do more by continuing to hire their assorted assassins, jhidits, etc. On the other hand, the anti-missile effort is great at funneling money into the pockets of defense contractors which be its main reason for existence. Just my thoughts.
Dei iudicium:I respect your beliefs however it is important to recognise that U.S./NATO anti-missile architecture can only achieve a survivable first strike situation (nuclear primacy) if employed after a pre-emptive debilitating first strike.
Correct. The problem is in a huge “IF”:if employed after a pre-emptive debilitating first strike. But first, notice that most of the text you quote refers to China of which I am not a specialist and whose nuclear forces I never studied in depth. But in the Russian case, here is what your “IF” implies. A first pre-emptive debilitating first strike would have to:
a) locate and decapitate the national command authorities (not only the President, but the military commands too.
b) destroy the silo-based Russian ICBMs
c) locate and destroy the mobile road-based Russian ICBMs
d) locate and destroy the mobile rail-based Russian ICBMs
e) locate and destroy the submarine based Russia ICBMs (including those in port)
f) locate and destroy the Russian strategic nuclear bombers (Tu-95s and Tu-160s)
g) locate and destroy the submarine based Russian nuclear SLCMs (cruise missiles)
Then, assuming most of the above would be successfully destroyed you would rely on the US/NATO anti-missile architecture to protect US/EU from retaliatory strikes. Except…
.. except that none of the objectives above would deal with the missile (Iskander) and Spetsnaz threat. So, on top of the above, you would ALSO have to
h) locate and destroy the Russian tactical missile force
i) locate and destroy the Russian Spetsnaz units
at which point, yes, “all” you would have to deal with are Russian tactical nuclear capabilities (tactical missiles, air-delivered, cruise-missiles, artillery and mini-nukes).
Does that sound like a plan to you?
Not to me, LOL! :-)
So, it is my firm belief that no US military planner would ever go along such a crazy scheme because for one thing they are military folks, they not only are acutely aware of Murphy’s Law, but they also know that not even the best plan can survive the initial contact with the enemy. Also, the Americans do A LOT of nuclear exchange modeling, they have plenty of top level civilian academics that do some great work in that field and as a result the Americans are extremely sophisticated players in the nuclear game. And that is a game which is 100% non-ideological and 100% pragmatic. Because if you get it wrong – the consequences are not a lost battle, but a lost planet.
Everything I said above also fully applies to the Russians and how they see US nuclear forces. They have come to the exact conclusion long ago (when Marshal Ogarkov was still in charge). This is why both sides go to precision conventional strikes and cyber-warfare and why both sides will never attack each other as long as their military have a de-facto veto on it.
Now leave a bunch of civilians in control and God only knows what they will do.
Nuclear war is way too serious a matter to be entrusted to civilians ;-)
Cheers and kind regards,
The Saker
Hi Saker. Do you know something about mercenaries of BLACKWATER -or whatever they’re called now- being active in Ukraine?
Here’s an interesting thread with videos:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1001178/pg1
The Saker, your beliefs are based on the assumption that nuclear war would not occur as strategic realities reveal it cannot effectively neutralise a retaliatory response. However my assessment that nuclear war is likely to eventually occur (indeed, recognising what is occurring, in the not too distant future) is based on probable situations occurring as a result of current developments. I believe it is more likely to result from desperation rather than calculation.
Wars often escalate beyond expectations and often have their own momentum to continue to do so. I believe it is highly unlikely that nuclear war will be planned. It is far more likely to be a result of a significant escalation that creates an imminent existential threat situation, necessitating a decisive response. Those who believe that such situations will not occur overlook the fact that the world has come close to nuclear war on several occasions.
With respect, you are welcome to dismiss my assessment as merely ‘civilian’. Of course only time will reveal if my assessment is correct or not. Recognising the implications of current developments, probable outcomes and approaching conflicts (Iran, N Korea, Ukraine, and unfortunately I believe that within a handful of years the answer will be clear. In the meantime, I am comfortable to wait and let time reveal if my assessment is correct or not. I hope that I am wrong.
@Dei iudicium:With respect, you are welcome to dismiss my assessment as merely ‘civilian’.
When I mentioned civilians, I meant politicians, not you. I am sorry I should have been clear and I sincerely apologize for what sounded like a rude dismissal.
I believe it is highly unlikely that nuclear war will be planned
I understand what you are saying, but let me add that both Russia and the USA have planned and tested nuclear wars many times. How so? Because of all forms of war, nuclear war is the simplest to model on computers. And over and over and over again the results of these tests show that a nuclear war cannot be won. At least not against the USA or Russia.
Now, I understand your point: war have a way to be triggered which, history shows, the sides do not always control. And I agree. And a conventional war could escalate into a nuclear war also in an unpredictable manner, and I accept that too. But so do the specialists in the USA and Russia and so have have developed very very sophisticated and highly redundant mechanisms to prevent that from happening. Can I give you a simple example?
People think that when Russia or the USA go on high nuclear alert the situation becomes more dangerous. It is, in fact, the opposite. It becomes more STABLE. How so? Simple – bombers leave their airbases and either disperse to secondary field or even stay in the air in holding positions. Submarines leave port and get flushed to the depth of the oceans. By doing that they all becomes LESS TARGETABLE and that, in turn, tells their commander in chief “your nukes are safe now, you are not in a *use them or use them* situation – you can take your time to think and evaluate all your options”.
I am not saying that the system is foolproof, no system ever is, but what I am saying is that a lot of very very smart people put a lot of thought into making it as fool proof and stable as can be.
As a result, yes, the latest anti-missile shield deployed by the USA is a terrible idea, it does make the system less stable, but the Russian response to it is sufficient to keep the system stable nonetheless.
Does that make sense to you?
Again, sorry for the misunderstanding, and kind regards,
The Saker
P2. (amendment to editing error and further information) ” Recognising the implications of current developments, probable outcomes and approaching conflicts (Iran, N Korea, Ukraine, China, etc.) ….”
It is worth considering the likely outcomes of approaching conflicts. These include: impending military operations against Hezbollah (debilitation operations that will seek to neutralise retaliatory/missile capabilities); similar operations against militant groups in Gaza; probable eventual military strikes against Iran (to ‘defang’ Iran); impending regime change/denuclearisation operations against North Korea (such as OP 5029 to secure/destroy nuclear assets and subsequent ‘stabilisation operations’); probable inflammation of tensions over Cyprus resources; planned NATO expansion to include Ukraine, Georgia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Republic of Macedonia, etc.; the ongoing destabilisation of Pakistan; efforts to displace Chinese commercial interests in Africa (coinciding with increasing military operations by allied Western states); an expanding proxy war against Syria (fuelled by the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Israel, Qatar, U.K., France, Turkey, Jordan, etc.); probability of an approaching larger regional conflagration in the Levant (possibly involving a multi-front conflict between Israel and Hezbollah/Syria/Gaza and possibly other states);……
P3. … unstable situation between Pakistan and India; ongoing U.S. and Israeli destabilisation/ partition/ propaganda/ regime change operations against Russia involving the support of assets within opposition groups, NGOs, media, dissident/separatist groups; the military build-up of assets around China (and preparations for potential military conflict evident by the development of the Air-Sea Battle concept plan); U.S./NATO military exercises/deployment of military assets that indicate preparations for potential military conflict with Russia; etc.,….
Many do not understand what is occurring. Unfortunately in time all will. I believe that in time these successive/concurrent wars and many globally expanding lower intensity conflicts will be recognised as one. When opposing nuclear armed bloc become involved in direct military conflict, it is likely that pride will overtake reason. Escalation will likely follow. There will no doubt be calls for peace. However, recognising that history is largely repeating, it is likely to already be too late.
With respect I repeat, I am comfortable to wait and let time reveal if my assessment is correct or not.
P4. Food for thought:
“The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking and we thus drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.” [A. Einstein].
I wonder if the defectors from the USSR who discussed two KGB’s and the long range penetration of the West resulting in a military defeat of the USA really were not quite sincere in their warnings. If the objective is planetary control by a small knot of oligarchs then the destruction of the United States is simply a price paid. After September 11 2001 It is not that far fetched that with economic collapse facing the West and China as well that the chess playing moves towards end game. A brief terrible war and populations that survive will embrace a global order planned in advance by the Plutonomists. A billion dead is not out of the question and from this evil perspective of total control entirely necessary as the price paid for resource control of planet Earth.
The Saker. Thank you for your reply. This is certainly the case (regarding the deployment of nuclear assets as an enhanced deterrent posture). However recognising the relentless push by certain groups to further expand and build-up the NATO military bloc, ongoing destabilisation/partition/regime change operations within Russia, plans to escalate hostile actions against Russia through economic warfare (isolation strategies/economic sabotage operations), etc., I can only expect the situation to gradually deteriorate, despite the efforts of Russian officials to resolve these disputes through dialogue. Indeed, it is remarkable that military conflict has been avoided so far. Understanding the increasingly hostile and confrontational position of U.S./EU/NATO/aligned Ukrainian groups that have embraced a dangerous level of brinkmanship, it is questionable if the avoidance of military conflict (in relation to Ukraine and indeed other approaching conflicts) can be maintained. Again, I hope that I am wrong.
With kind regards.
Deiiudicium.
I agree with the commenters who say that Hitler was the only leader during the 1930’s & 40’s who could have saved the “West”. He could also have brought the resurrection of Orthodox Russia 50 years or so earlier had he been successful. Hitler was not against ethnic Russian or Ukrainian Christians but the Khazar Communists and their sayanim. In fact he did not hate other races nor did he wish to exterminate or enslave them, he just loved his people more which is natural. Please watch “Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told” at http://www.thegreateststorynevertold.tv
You will see parallels with Germany of the 1930’s & 40’s with Russia and Putin today.
@Saker
> I personally have known MANY people who suffered horrors at the hands of the Nazis, and I have absolutely *zero* sympathy for him or his followers.
For one, Hitler and “the Nazis” aren’t identical. Sure, Hitler was the chief, but neither did he order everything that happened, nor did he condone everything. And of course Hitler was ruthless, and would have never been able to reach the helm of the Nazis, and of Germany.
However, no one gets elected and cheered on by millions and millions of people, just for being a killer, for decades. The portrayal of Hitler as a pure monster and nothing else by Western media is complete non-sense. All that we see of Hitler nowadays is the suffering he participated in bringing over humanity. And that’s just not an accurate picture of history.
Also it is important to keep in mind the timing of events. E.g. Churchill, the great “hero” of the 20th century was a complete asshole, who desperately craved to go to war with Germany, and provoking Hitler where he could, even though Hitler had made it clear many times over many years that he didn’t want to harm the British Empire in any way. These provocations where mainly bombing raids on German civilians – an obvious war crime – when Hitler hadn’t done anything of that sort yet.
And what follows from there can’t be laid 100% at the door of Hitler. Ironically, Churchill, the old drunkard, “committed suicide from fear of death”: He said he wanted to protect the British Empire from Hitler, who didn’t mean harm to it, by provoking war with Germany, with the help of American loans, that actually crushed the British Empire. After the war, not much was left of the British Empire…
“Hitler’s War” is a must read for anyone trying to understand the 20th century – and also the Churchill biographies by the excellent David Irving. Irving goes into specifics, who said what to whom when, which allows you to understand why Hitler and others did things, and when they agreed or did not agree to cruelties etc. Political responsibility for a lot the Nazis did, which I too would mostly attribute to Hitler, is different from what he wanted. And certainly actual responsibility has to be given to Himmler and other people who overstepped their authorities and did things the “Chief” didn’t order. There is no such thing as an all-powerful dictator who can control everything. Even a dictator such as Hitler had to refrain from punishing his subordinates if he wanted to stay in power.
Why do I think it is important to know the actual details of the histories of Hitler, Churchill and their policies? Because Hitler wasn’t as pure evil monster as he is being portrayed, and the same blackening that happened to Hitler, has been started to be applied to Putin, almost from the start of his political career. And for the same reasons: Hitler did not conform to the established world order, he loathed the machinations of the finance industry, and he was dangerous because he looked like he could successfully implement an alternative system. In that, Putin is quite similar.
I hope Putin stays his course and will not respond to provocations, unless not responding would turn Russia into a country that is incapable of breathing and defending itself.
Honk