Protesters in Ukraine remind us of the priceless benefits of being EU members

[JayH]

ACTUALLY .....

China's active military forces are MUCH larger than the US's.   2.285,000 compared to 1,429,995.  Add in the 850,000 active reservists and then you can claim largest in the world.  However, China also has 385,821,101 eligible for service.  So.  There you go.

In comparison:  Russia has 776,000 active and Ukraine has around 130,000 active, but is calling up its reserves.

I would be the first to agree, however, that the US armed forces are the most powerful in the world. 

Source:  Jane's and Wikipedia.

Ukraine has the ability to grow almost immediately to over 1 million . The army over the last 10 years has been considerably reduced in numbers--but significantly re-organised in efficiency compared to Russia-so not simply a numbers game.
Also of interest---

http://argumentua.com/stati/zavoevat-ukrainu-rossiyane-ne-smogut-pod-nimi-budet-goret-zemlya-poimut-chto-takoe-ad

Sergiy Stakhovsky: "We were taken hostage by the country to which we trusted the most"

Ukrainian human consciousness from another world. One story
"Gaining Ukraine Russians can not - will burn beneath the earth. Understand what the hell "

 MON, 03/10/2014 8:10
 Which scenarios Moscow should prepare Ukraine? Opinion of General Intelligence.

How justified is the tactics of "soft resistance" resorted to Ukraine in response to Russia's military aggression in the Crimea? Are the Ukrainian armed forces, in principle, oppose the Russians? Which scenarios Moscow should prepare Ukraine? Of course, in actual conditions it is difficult to get answers to these questions in the current leadership of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Therefore LB.ua tried to do, talking to former leadership.

Lieutenant-General Nikolai Miller retired in 2005 as Deputy Chief of Defence Intelligence. While the relationship with the "island" (the name of Ukrainian military intelligence on professional military slang associated with the location on Fisherman's Island GUR Kiev), based on our conversation, regular support.

That is logical: former intelligence does not happen. The record of General Miller - real combat experience in Africa and the creation of the National Guard of Ukraine. General LB.ua found in good spirits - he just got regular SMS threats for his performance in a television broadcast yesterday.

About the war in the Crimea

- Please explain to people who are far from the armed forces, what is happening now. There are actual and naked aggression of a foreign country, while Ukrainian army does not use of force in response? This is the right decision?

- I can not answer this question. As a military man, as a professional who has experience in warfare, I do not understand. When attacking even guardroom should open fire. The fact that the Russians are now doing in the Crimea with our military units - this is unacceptable. Every military officer will tell you that in this situation it is necessary to act. But ...

- But do not act. Why?

-  I think the political leadership of the country does not permit the use of weapons. And so what they have motives - it is necessary to ask the Minister of Defense and Chief of Staff.

I am an army general. In Crimea, we have fighters, air defense there - one of the strongest in the country. When there were flying Russian helicopters, 12 Il-76 aircraft - could knock at least part of the 12 aircraft. This would be an appropriate response to aggression. In any charter, even guard duty, says that the attack on the time you can use the weapon without warning, the object - similarly. Statutes approved by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. And today, their officers do not perform.

- This means that the military had orders not to perform the statutes?

- Definitely. I know the guys from the 4th Marine Brigade - very professional, real patriots. In Crimea, people speak mostly Russian, but many of them are patriots of Ukraine.

I imagine that the guys are going through when they are given the command to stand unarmed when actually shooting them. You've all probably seen the video where our military go with the flag and sing the anthem. I have no words - I can only bow to them.

But how feasible this tactic - I do not know. Perhaps the lack of resistance and defuse the situation stabilizes. But I do not believe Putin, to be honest. Putin - the aggressor and the State Duma - is, in fact, the official terrorists. Believe they can not.

- A Ukrainian army was ready to use weapons in case of aggression?

- Parts, located in the Crimea, could very quickly lead to the team on full alert.

- But if the Ukrainian military opened fire on the aggressor - it would be a full-fledged war.

- Yes, the war. And, of course, this war, we would first have lost. And now the Russians would have been near Kiev, they planned to throw more desantura here on Sunday ...

- So you think that the Ukrainian army is not able to resist the Russian army today in principle?

- Against the component under which Russia has tightened border against airborne units, we would have been powerless. Our eastern border is almost completely naked. Divisions were destroyed in Luhansk, Kharkiv, Chernihiv. Nearest team who can act quickly - in the White Church in Zhitomir. All teams that are closer to the eastern boundary, understaffed. They will not be able to act effectively.

So perhaps the decision not to respond to aggression was rational. There intercepted conversations Putin with his chief command of the Black Sea Fleet. "Why did not you act? .. Why did not they shoot? .. What do you do for this? .." Generally, intelligence gives a lot of information, but I can not say anything because I'm afraid to hurt.

- But does Russia need a reason in principle to a landing or start a fire? And so they can say that killing Russians in the Crimea, and to do next, whatever.

- Yes. Or will some of provocation "titushek." They still even walk around Kiev and waiting in the wings. And believe me, the army also have officers who portraits Minister and Chief of the Lebedev Yanukovych still kept in the lockers.

But, as I said, Russia will be able to win an armed conflict only at first. Russians hold here will not - will burn beneath the earth. There is such a guerrilla, they will understand what the hell. You've seen what our people, when was the Maidan. Russians who come here, not to be envied.

- Russian Defense Minister claims that the Russian military in the Crimea, the Black Sea Fleet except parts, no. The question is what Ukraine should do with these "void" commandos?

- Yes, they are unmarked, as terrorists. But our intelligence known what part of the Russian Armed Forces relates each of these machines, which is now in the Crimea, and the rooms have teams. So they are trying to deceive anyone - is unknown.

I will tell you why the Russian special forces in the Crimea it operates so brazenly - trying to capture bases and territory. They need somewhere to stay. If you give them military units, they will enter into them are forever, to kick them out of there will be almost impossible.

But basically, if Russia refuses to recognize these soldiers their - we have the right to disarm them, as some unknown gunmen.

- But how to disarm?

- For example, thrown into amphibious brigade.

- Entry to the Crimea blocked.

- God ... Well what to assault brigade this roadblock?

- Tell me, judging by the maneuvers - what Russia is preparing? By siege? By the war?

- Go to war. And not only in the Crimea.

They all prepared. There offensive plan through Chernihiv, Kharkiv, Lugansk. But the plan is not implemented until now, as the population in these regions is not acting with the active separatist sentiments, as expected the Russians. But in any case, they will saturate these regions provocative element to them to rebel.

Generally, the maximum plan - separate from Ukraine Crimea, Kharkiv, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporozhye, Kherson, Nikolaev, Odessa region.

There was also another version of the blitzkrieg - taking Kiev plant here and Viktor Yanukovych. Remember how Dobkin said? "Exempt from the brown plague, since Kharkov, and persecute banedrovtsev and nationalists of Kiev." However, this option is less likely. Russian just hoped that they will be welcomed with flowers here. And when not met - realized that until further Crimea can not go.

- How is it that Admiral Denis Berezovsky, who was appointed commander of the Navy, two days later defected to the enemy?

- The fact that all this military counterintelligence, which we inherited from Sovietization, and not too much has changed: there are many former "special person" that only work against the patriotic officers.

- You want to say that this Russian agents?

- Yes, the agents. On the pressure on the family, which they say, Berezovsky - officer, he knew what he was talking. Especially, do not just officer - Admiral. I was also under pressure, so what? Also threaten the family. Think commanders in the Crimea is not "pressed" do not threaten their families? This is not a reason to sell their country and honor.

This is a betrayal .

Actually I was surprised that Igor Tenyukh (Minister of Defence - approx. LB.ua) did not see that rot - because he knew very well Berezovsky.

In topic: Traitors - troops loyal to the Kremlin. List
- In this case we see that in a totally corrupt state in the army without the normal personnel policy, Ukrainian officers and generals remained loyal to the oath. We now see that in the Crimea officers refuse to side with the enemy , despite the fact that they offer a huge amount of money that they are just in their lives do not work ...

In the army, there are teachers who prepare the younger generation, trying to bring up patriotism, explain the meaning of honor.

But it turns out differently. You've seen that done on the Maidan police officers and interior troops - beat and the elderly, and women, although all of us are taught that beat women, children and old people is unacceptable. I'm talking about the police do not want to say that this officer. Because you will not find any general MIA, who would live in such a flat, I - Lieutenant General, which took large positions. And such Ukrainian generals in the army, believe me, very much.

About the internal troops and the National Guard

- Internal forces can be considered heirs of the National Guard, which you created in 1991?

- No. You know, the National Guard was created from scratch in 1991, when he was a very serious rise of patriotism. Ukrainians officers went to serve in the National Guard from all regions of the former USSR.

The National Guard - it was a mobile structure, which had its helicopters, including - fighting could quickly relocate anywhere in Ukraine. And numbered 40,000 men, mostly - for special purposes. And, accordingly, had weapons and equipment.

We could be at war with anyone. But in 2000, the National Guard was disbanded - I had already resigned. Disbanded for several reasons: because it created a great competition to all other power structures, and because of certain intrigue in the state leadership. And then the former guardsmen became internal troops. Kravchenko (then Minister of Internal Affairs - approx. LB.ua) took their weapons, the military element of training and sent to patrol the streets actually.

- And as SWAT officers responded that they dressed in police uniform?

- Gone. Most. Many went into the armed forces.

When I watched the video with a Cossack GAVRILYUK, and learned that it is stripped of its fighters Internal Troops - I was shocked, as an officer.

I will not say that today in the internal troops - some rascals. There's a decent officers. But if education in Natsgvardii was based on our history, to the Cossacks, education of patriotism, the BB's ... go to their museum, immediately see "created Nicholas II." Their ideological foundation became the NKVD troops . When we were in Lviv under the guard gave the room where before NKVD regiment settled there in a prominent place the bust Nikolai Kuznetsov (Soviet spy, fought with the UPA, was killed by the rebels - approx. Ed.). So, now in the rooms of the Internal Troops - these scoundrels, Nicholas II and Kuznetsov.

- Do not you think that they fought on the Maidan with people not just because the leadership gave an order, but also because of the commitment to certain ideals?

- Of course, their zombie like  "Berkut" , as Russians - told myths about Banderivtsy and so on.

- And, after all, there was a possibility during the confrontation at the Independence fighters convince BB not to use force to peaceful people?

- We few generals tried to repeat what they did in 2004 during the Orange Revolution - agree that the troops did not go against the people, including - internal troops.

In 2004, Yushchenko asked us Skipalsky (Alexander Skipalsky - former chief of the Defense Ministry of Intelligence - approx. LB.ua) to do everything to prevent bloodshed. And we really went to Alexander Kikhtenko, who was then deputy commander of the Interior Troops, and agreed with him that the internal forces will not act against the people. He asked for assurance that it is not touched. Then Tymoshenko promised he will appoint him commander of explosives. Counterintelligence was with us too ...

When did the Maidan in 2013 - also had the opportunity to negotiate with the internal troops. With the same Tenyukh I said, told him that we can Kikhtenko to negotiate - Kikhtenko still has great credibility in the internal troops. But no one listened to us. And then, after the events in Hrushevskoho it was too late - to contact one of the leaders of the internal troops went. In addition, they were clearly ready to move on the side of the people, they just propped "Berkut", well, they obeyed Zaharchenko .

- And what about the internal forces do now? After all, what did they do?

- Renaming will not work. You know who our commander there appointed Interior Minister Arsen Avakov ? Stepan Poltorak! The very lieutenant-general, who led the Kharkov Academy of Ministry of Internal Affairs, hand in hand with Dobkin worked all the time, which brought here to Independence thousand cadets that they were against the people here. Honorary Citizen of Kharkiv - it is the title given Dobkin with Kernes. When Moscow agents raised in Kharkov Russian flag, the entire Academy sat in silence, as if it there or not. And there students - prerasno trained fighters. We do not want the Internal Troops with the command - they shall burn with a blue flame.

I propose to restore the National Guard - such as it was created in 1991. I have already prepared a draft law, which says that the National Guard of Ukraine is a special purpose law enforcement agency, created on the basis of joint military units for the protection of important public facilities, military special forces units of internal troops. It is charged with the protection of Ukraine's sovereignty, territorial integrity, life, liberty and dignity.

Guard can play the role of mobile combat units. But she had to be placed somewhere, need bases, weapons, equipment, budget. Need to return everything that was given to the internal security forces, and to do so immediately.

Also in the Guard could include our hundreds of which still stand on the Maidan. That they will sit there in tents? We'll take them to the army, officially take the service, armed. They probably want to serve the motherland.

- Maybe not everyone wants to.

-  Maybe not all, but many will want. Who has a higher education - can be assigned the rank of officer. Of course, they have to be trained because Maidan protect and serve in the regular army - are two different things. There's a strong man, but must be taught. Imagine, in general, what kind of people - coped with special forces, with only wooden shields.

Now people go to mass military conscription. And in Russia see it. If now adopt the law on the National Guard - can invite volunteers into it. It would be a serious factor of psychological pressure. Although now the queues in military conscription - a factor of psychological pressure. In Ukraine, a very large resource mobilization.

- You've already talked about creating Natsgvardii with the country? Do you have a dialogue with the new defense minister, for example?

- No. Although we are familiar with, but at the Independence we quarreled. Because of this negotiation process with the internal troops. I offered to help, and I said: "We have everything under control, we'll see."

[Ade]

You see?

Shoot me please.

[SANDRO43]

US Navy's aircraft carrier George Bush arrives in Turkey

They want to scare the pants off the Russian tourists there ?

[GQBlues]

Frustrated from the infamous Russian stubbornness of epic proportion, Obama reached out to Russian President Herr Vladimir Putin and reluctantly gave him one final promise. Obama was recorded as telling Putin...

"If you like your plan. You can keep your plan. Period!'

Unlike the liberal eager-beaver Americans who are almost always ready to latch on to anything *free*, Putin was not amused.

Seriously. Much ado 'bout nothing. Ukraine has a very deep kinship to Russia. To believe otherwise is silly. Ukraine is far better off with Russia than they can ever be with Europe.

Ukraine's problem is internal, in its politicians and its populace general disregard to the rule of law. Until this changes, nothing can be progressive regardless of alliance.

I do hope the very best for Ukraine.

[JayH]

Another charge of the light brigade.   
 
US Navy's aircraft carrier George Bush arrives in Turkey
 

Someone getting a few ducks in a row?
US Navy's aircraft carrier George Bush arrives in Turkey

KYIV, March 10 /Ukrinform/. The U.S. Navy's aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush arrived in the Turkish port of Antalya on Sunday, March 9.
In addition, the guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea, arrived in the Turkish port of Aksaz on March 9, according to the official website of the U.S. Navy.
"The newest Nimitz-Class aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77) arrived in Antalya, Turkey for a scheduled port visit, on March 9," reads the statement.
This port visit is designed "to strengthen maritime security working with our Turkish partners."
The statement also notes that the guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea, attached to the George H.W. Bush Carrier Strike Group (GHWBCSG), arrived in Aksaz, Turkey, on March 9, for a scheduled port call.
The guided-missile destroyer USS Roosevelt arrived in Split, Croatia, for a routine, regularly scheduled port visit, on March 8. The guided missile destroyer USS Truxtun arrived in Romania for a scheduled port visit on March 8 to participate in joint exercises between the navies of the United States, Romania and Bulgaria in the Black Sea.
Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey said earlier that the U.S. military was prepared to back up NATO if the unrest in Ukraine escalates.

Added from a different source----

"NATO deploy its aircraft at the Ukrainian borders Block NATO announced that it will place in Poland and Romania reconnaissance planes to monitor the Ukrainian crisis. NATO spokesman said that permission for such accommodation provided on Monday, reports the BBC. "All AWACS reconnaissance flights (aircraft radar beam tracking - Ed.) Will be made ​​solely on Alliance territory," - said a spokesman for NATO. statement was made ​​at a time when Russia is tightening control over the Ukrainian Crimea before the referendum on March 16. As you know, the authorities in Kiev and the West call a referendum unconstitutional. According to diplomatic correspondent for BBC Jonathan Marcus, the main task of the mission - to reassure members of the alliance, and most flights will be carried out with NATO air bases in Germany and Britain. As previously reported, because of the situation in Ukraine Crimea enhanced protection of the border with Transnistria. Ukrainian border guards launched a special operation "Frontier" to keep out armed intervention in Ukraine."
AND MORE ON THIS__

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26521311

[Larry1]

Someone please tell Putin that he can have Detroit.

In these days of ever-increasing US federal debt I'm not sure we should borrow additional sums in order to pay Putin the huge amount of money it would take for Russia to take Detroit off our hands.

[lordtiberius]

Actually an aviator, but to be a Marine grunt would be an honor. Last time I checked, those nations were our NATO allies. Putin has displayed illegal aggression upon a sovereign, unaligned nation. It is not unreasonable to suppose that he will extend his insane behavior to the Baltic nations, who have significant Russian speaking minorities.

Keeping our forces in UK, Germany, and Italy, hundreds of miles west of a possible Russian invasion front, is absurd. Your lack of strategic perspective is not surprising. Your one-liners, in your post, show a certain intellectual dysfunction also. I thought you were more intelligent than your inane post now shows you to be. Or possibly...your philosophical pacifism trumps all other considerations?

Are you in Lugansk?

[JayH]

Officials from the EU, US, Japan and Turkey met in London on Tuesday to draw up a list of Russians who could be subject to the sanctions, as Kiev called on London and Washington to live up to their commitments to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine. Britain, the US and Russia were signatories to the Budapest memorandum in 1994 in which they agreed to uphold the newly independent Ukraine's borders in exchange for the surrender of the nuclear arsenal it inherited from the Soviet Union.

Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the interim Ukrainian prime minister, said: "If you do not uphold these guarantees which you signed up to in the Budapest memorandum, then explain how you will convince Iran and North Korea to give up their nuclear status."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/11/eu-tells-russia-start-ukraine-talks-or-face-sanctions

[JayH]

A point in the following article that keeps getting repeated-- the Tartar population in the Crimea is 12%-- this seems to infer that is the only likely opposition to Russian takeover.That is not correct-- add the Ukrainian derived population and it is 50% ish-- plus many of Russian derived Ukrainian population it does not leave a majority who want to be Russian citizens. Previous polls back that up.
So for those that consider all this a done deal-- it is not. Above all else-- Russian invading and imposing Russian will over the whole poulation at the point of a gun--is way over the top-overkill if you like. It was a totally unnecessary invasion-- because they could do it-does not mean they should have done it.
When you consider Russia's overall attempt to destabilise Ukraine-- it needs to be understood that was not just about the Crimea alone-it was( & is) an overall attempt to take over all of Ukraine.



http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/11/us-ukraine-crisis-idUSBREA1Q1E820140311

 
 
Ukraine appeals to West as Crimea turns to Russia
BY ANDREW OSBORN AND ALASTAIR MACDONALD
SEVASTOPOL/KIEV Tue Mar 11, 2014 7:42pm EDT


(Reuters) - Ukraine's government appealed for Western help on Tuesday to stop Moscow annexing Crimea but the Black Sea peninsula, overrun by Russian troops, seemed fixed on a course that could formalize rule from Moscow within days.

With their own troops in Crimea effectively prisoners in their bases, the new authorities in Kiev painted a sorry picture of the military bequeathed them by the pro-Moscow president overthrown two weeks ago. They announced the raising of a new National Guard to be drawn from volunteers among veterans.

The prime minister, heading for talks at the White House and United Nations, told parliament in Kiev he wanted the United States and Britain, as guarantors of a 1994 treaty that saw Ukraine give up its Soviet nuclear weapons, to intervene both diplomatically and militarily to fend off Russian "aggression".

But despite NATO reconnaissance aircraft patrolling the Polish and Romanian borders and U.S. naval forces preparing for exercises in the Black Sea, Western powers have made clear that, as when ex-Soviet Georgia lost territory in fighting in 2008, they have no appetite for risking turning the worst East-West crisis since the Cold War into a military conflict with Moscow.

Diplomacy seemed restricted to a war of words. The U.S. and Russian foreign ministers did speak by telephone. But the U.S. State Department said Moscow's position offered no room for negotiation and the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement condemning U.S. financial aid to the "illegitimate regime" in Kiev, which it calls ultra-nationalists with "Nazi" links.

That language echoed ousted Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich, who gave a news conference in Russia insisting that he was still the legitimate head of state. Toppled by protests sparked by his rejection of closer ties with the European Union in favor of a deal from Russian President Vladimir Putin, Yanukovich blamed his enemies for provoking Crimean secession.

Parliament in Kiev, whose position is backed by Western governments, dismisses plans for a referendum on Sunday to unite the region with Russia as illegitimate and resolved on Tuesday to dissolve Crimea's regional assembly if by Wednesday it had not scrapped the plebiscite. There seems no chance that it will.

Moscow, which to widespread scorn denies its troops have any role in the takeover of the once Russian-ruled region, says people in Crimea, a small majority of whom are ethnic Russians, should have the right to secede. It has made much of anti-Russian sentiment among some Ukrainian nationalists - though many native Russian speakers in Ukraine are wary of Putin.

SANCTIONS, REFERENDUM

U.S. lawmakers are preparing sanctions against Russia and European Union leaders could impose penalties, such as bans on visas for key officials, as early as Monday.

By then, however, Crimea could already have voted - in a referendum not recognized by Kiev or the West - to seek union with Russia. The ballot paper offers no option to retain the status quo of autonomy within Ukraine.

Voters among the two million population must choose either direct union with Moscow or restoring an old constitution that made Crimea sovereign with ties to Ukraine. On Tuesday, the regional assembly passed a resolution that a sovereign Crimea would sever links to Kiev and join Russia anyway.

The Russian parliament has already approved the accession in principle of Crimea, which was handed to Ukraine by Soviet rulers 60 years ago. Still, it is not clear whether or how soon Putin would formalize such a union as he engages in a complex confrontation with the West for geostrategic advantage.

In disputes with Georgia, Russia has granted recognition to small breakaway states on its borders, a process critics view as annexation in all but name. It fiercely criticized Western recognition of the independence of Kosovo from its ally Serbia - a process which Crimea's parliament nonetheless cited as a legal precedent for its own forthcoming declaration of independence.

There seems little chance that Crimea's new leaders, who emerged after Yanukovich's overthrow as Russian-backed forces took control of the peninsula, will fail to get the result they want. A boycott by ethnic Tatars, 12 percent of the regional population and deeply wary after centuries of persecution by Moscow, will have little effect as there is no minimum turnout.

In Sevastopol, the Crimean home port of Russia's Black Sea Fleet, Valery Medvedev, the chairman of the city's electoral commission, made no pretence at concealing his own preference:

"We're living through historic times. Sevastopol would love to fulfil its dream of joining Russia. I want to be part of Russia and I'm not embarrassed to say that," he told reporters.

There is little sign of campaigning by those opposed to the government line. Billboards in Sevastopol urge people to vote and offer a choice of two images of Crimea - one in the colors of the Russian flag, the other emblazoned with a swastika.

UKRAINIAN TROOPS

It is unclear whether thousands of Ukrainian servicemen, many of whom are native Crimeans but are effectively trapped on their bases and ships by Russian troops and local militia allies, will take part in the referendum.

One sailor, who declined to be named, said he would only vote if he got the order from his commander to do so, a position echoed by many other servicemen spoken to by Reuters. They all said they would vote for Crimea to remain part of Ukraine.

Elena Prokhina, an ethnic Russian planning to vote for union with Moscow, said she feared the referendum could lead to conflict with others in Ukraine, notably nationalists in the Ukrainian-speaking west of the country of 46 million.

"Knowing what I know about the fanaticism of the western Ukrainians, we will have to defend our rights after the referendum," she said. "They won't just let us leave."

Around Sevastopol, Ukrainian military facilities remained under virtual siege on Tuesday. At an air defense base outside Sevastopol, dozens of men who looked like Russian soldiers were camping outside the gate, while an armed Ukrainian serviceman could be seen pacing the base's roof keeping a wary eye on them.

In the port, two Ukrainian warships remained on alert but unable to set sail because of Russian vessels and a cable strung across the harbor by Russian forces. Relatives of the sailors come to the dockside every day to converse and provide food.

A Ukrainian officer said there was a fragile understanding between the two fleets not to escalate the situation, but he said nerves were frayed: "The Russians have not troubled us until now," he said. "But all it takes is one order and they will open fire. We won't be able to hold out long".

CALL FOR HELP

In parliament, the acting defense minister said that of some 41,000 infantry mobilized last week, Ukraine could field only about 6,000 combat-ready troops, compared to over 200,000 Russians deployed on the country's eastern borders. The prime minister said the air force was outnumbered 100 to one.

Acting president Oleksander Turchinov warned against provoking Russia, saying that would play into Moscow's hands, as he announced plans to mobilize a National Guard, though he gave little detail of its size or expected functions.

Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk, who will visit the White House and United Nations Security Council this week, said the 1994 treaty under which Ukraine agreed to give up its Soviet nuclear weapons obliged Russia to remove troops from Crimea and also meant Western powers should defend Ukraine's sovereignty.

"What does the current military aggression of the Russian Federation on Ukrainian territory mean?" he said.

"It means that a country which voluntarily gave up nuclear weapons, rejected nuclear status and received guarantees from the world's leading countries is left defenseless and alone in the face of a nuclear state that is armed to the teeth.

"I say this to our Western partners: if you do not provide guarantees, which were signed in the Budapest Memorandum, then explain how you will persuade Iran or North Korea to give up their status as nuclear states."

Parliament passed a resolution he had proposed calling on the United States and Britain, co-signatories with Russia of that treaty to "fulfil their obligations ... and take all possible diplomatic, political, economic and military measures urgently to end the aggression and preserve the independence, sovereignty and existing borders of Ukraine".

But Western powers have been careful to note that Ukraine, not being a member of NATO, has no automatic claim on their help and Ukrainian officials gave no details on what they hoped for. The wording of the 1994 treaty indicates that help is only required if Ukraine is threatened by a nuclear attack.

[JayH]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/13/world/europe/ukraine-washington.html?_r=0


Obama Makes Diplomatic Push to Defuse Crisis in Ukraine
By PETER BAKER and MICHAEL R. GORDONMARCH 12, 2014

President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry met with the interim prime minister, Arseniy P. Yatsenyuk, at the White House to discuss the Ukraine crisis.
y
WASHINGTON — President Obama and Ukraine’s interim prime minister opened the door on Wednesday to a political solution that could lead to more autonomy for Crimea if Russian troops withdraw, as the United States embarked on a last-ditch diplomatic effort to defuse a crisis that reignited tensions between East and West.

The tentative feeler came as Mr. Obama dispatched Secretary of State John Kerry to London to meet with his Russian counterpart on Friday, two days before a Russian-supported referendum in Crimea on whether to secede from Ukraine. Mr. Obama said the world would “completely reject” what he called a “slapdash election,” but added he still hoped for a peaceful settlement.


Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany and  President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia in Berlin in June 2012. Their countries have been trading partners, and rivals, for centuries.Ukraine Crisis Limits Merkel’s Rapport With PutinMARCH 12, 2014
“There are a lot of variants here, which is why it is urgent that we have this conversation with the Russians,” Secretary of State John Kerry said.Kerry Plans 11th-Hour Meeting With Russians Over CrimeaMARCH 12, 2014
People in Sevastopol watched the televised speech of former Ukrainian president Viktor F. Yanukovych on Tuesday.Air Links Are Severed as Russia Tightens Its Grip on Crimean PeninsulaMARCH 11, 2014
In a show of solidarity for the besieged Ukraine, Mr. Obama hosted a White House visit by Arseniy P. Yatsenyuk, the country’s pro-Western acting prime minister, and vowed to “stand with Ukraine.” But he also hinted at a formulation that could be the basis for the coming talks between Mr. Kerry and Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, recognizing Moscow’s interest in helping the Russian-speaking population in Crimea while affirming that it is part of Ukraine.

Mr. Obama said Mr. Yatsenyuk told him that a new Ukrainian government formed after elections scheduled for May 25 could find ways to address Crimea’s concerns. “There is a constitutional process in place and a set of elections that they can move forward on that, in fact, could lead to different arrangements over time with the Crimean region,” Mr. Obama said. “But that is not something that can be done with the barrel of a gun pointed at you.”

At a separate appearance later in the day, Mr. Yatsenyuk expressed willingness to consider concessions to Crimea. “We the Ukrainian government are ready to start a nationwide dialogue how to increase the rights of autonomous Republic of Crimea, starting with taxes and ending with other aspects like language issues,” he told an audience at the Atlantic Council.

Any such discussion, he added, had to take place in a “constitutional manner” rather than imposed by Russian troops. But he did not rule out holding a local referendum if authorized by the Ukrainian Parliament. “Only afterward, this referendum could be a constitutional one,” he said.

Mr. Yatsenyuk also tried to reassure Moscow by saying he respects the longstanding agreement permitting a Russian naval base in Crimea, and that Ukraine would make no provocative moves like cutting off water, electricity and other supplies to the peninsula, which has no direct land connection to Russia.

But he used his visit to Washington to make clear that despite his preference for talks, his government would not accept partition of the country. “Mr. President,” he told Mr. Obama in the Oval Office, “it’s all about the freedom. We fight for our freedom. We fight for our independence. We fight for our sovereignty. And we will never surrender.”

Mr. Kerry employed similarly tough language during testimony Wednesday on Capitol Hill, where he said the United States and its partners were prepared to impose tough sanctions if Russia moved to annex Crimea. “It can get ugly fast if the wrong choices are made, and it can get ugly in multiple directions,” he said. “Our hope is that there is a way to have a reasonable outcome here.”

Continue reading the main story

Hosting Obama, "Between Two Ferns" star pulls no punches
Some renewals on Fox
Following Lindsay Lohan after her latest rehab
Continue reading the main story

 
In fact, he suggested the two sides could continue talking even if Sunday’s referendum is held, as long as Russia stops short of annexation. “There are a lot of variants here, which is why it is urgent that we have this conversation with the Russians,” he said. The United States has “exchanged some thoughts” with Moscow on how to address the crisis, he said, but the two sides “haven’t had a meeting of the minds.”

For Mr. Yatsenyuk, the visit to Washington was not just about rallying support against Russia but was also an effort to seek an economic booster shot for his vulnerable economy. Yet even as both American political parties celebrated Mr. Yatsenyuk as a hero and promised to help Ukraine, a bid to provide financial assistance bogged down in a polarized Congress.

The Republican-led House has passed legislation authorizing $1 billion in loan guarantees, but the Democratic-led Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday passed, in a 14-to-3 vote, an alternative version that attached long-stalled reforms to the International Monetary Fund sought by the Obama administration. The administration and its allies contend that the I.M.F. changes would raise loan limits for countries like Ukraine, while House Republicans maintain they would weaken American influence at the organization and expose taxpayers to more risk.

Continue reading the main story
RECENT COMMENTS

yucan 7 minutes ago
so now the US is so concerned about treaties and the sovereignty of nations and upholding UN principles, when it has invaded how many...
Stephen Miller 8 minutes ago
Did I read this correctly? Marco Rubio is so concerned about punishing Russia, but can't make a vote because he has jury duty? A US...
David 9 minutes ago
The Ukraine in an economic crisis had two options (1) The sphere of influence of the IMF (or the West) (2) The sphere of influence of...
SEE ALL COMMENTS  WRITE A COMMENT
The Treasury Department has lobbied Congress to approve the reforms since they were negotiated in 2010, and this moment might be its best chance to finally pass them. With Ukraine in financial free-fall, the department has redoubled its efforts, arguing that the country’s standing in the I.M.F., and the fund’s standing in the world, are at stake.

“We’re already hearing calls by some to say if the United States doesn’t approve them, we should maybe move on without them,” Jacob J. Lew, the Treasury secretary, told a Senate committee on Wednesday. “That’s not a good place for the United States to be.”

Some Senate Republicans and other party figures sided with the Obama administration. A group of officials from President George W. Bush’s administration sent a letter of support on Wednesday signed by Condoleezza Rice, the former secretary of state; Paul H. O’Neill and John W. Snow, the former treasury secretaries; Tom Ridge, the former homeland security secretary; and Stephen J. Hadley, the former national security adviser.

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, said he was trying to persuade House Republicans to support the I.M.F. changes. “International organizations like the I.M.F. can provide stability at a time we really need it,” he said. “It’s a strategic tool for U.S. foreign policy. We would be shortsighted not to embrace these reforms.”

CONTINUE READING THE MAIN STORY
156
COMMENTS
But Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, said the Obama administration was trying to take advantage of the crisis to advance unrelated policy goals. “This legislation is supposed to be about assisting Ukraine and punishing Russia, and the I.M.F. measure completely undercuts both of these goals by giving Putin’s Russia something it wants,” he said, although he missed the committee vote, citing jury duty in Miami.

The administration is trying to help the new Ukrainian government in other ways by organizing a business summit meeting, creating an innovation council, consulting on an increase in energy security, providing military rations, increasing student exchanges and sending the F.B.I. to help locate assets looted by the pro-Russian government in Kiev toppled by street protests last month.

With Mr. Yatsenyuk at his side, Mr. Obama pledged again to “apply a cost” on Russia if it does not reverse course in Ukraine. “There’s another path available, and we hope that President Putin is willing to seize that path,” he said. “But if he does not, I’m very confident that the international community will stand strongly behind the Ukrainian government in preserving its unity and its territorial integrity.”

[JayH]

A verr appropriate title-- the reality is that it is life & death for Ukraine and Ukrainians. It seems to me in reading forums( not so much here) that for some it is like choosing a football team-- and you blindly follow that side-or should I say that version of events. The problem with that is that it is clear one side is telling lies!!
There have been many articles on the crisis-here is another one of interest.


Ukraine crisis is not a game
By Ilya Lozovsky, Special to CNN
Editor’s note: Program Officer for Eurasia on Freedom House's Emergency Assistance Program. The views expressed are the writer’s own.
During a complex, fast-moving crisis such as the one now unfolding in Ukraine, it is tempting for some commentators to advocate taking the “long view.” This school of thought, which carries more than a whiff of Cold War nostalgia, reduces the struggle for Ukraine to a geopolitical game in which the various competing actors – the United States, the European Union and Russia – become featureless billiard balls ricocheting off each other. Ukraine becomes Russia’s “historical backyard,” or even worse, a subordinate part of its “legitimate sphere of influence” which we are urged to respect. Approaching the unfolding Ukrainian crisis in this way has the advantage of appearing sober, practical, and dispassionate. It is also dead wrong.
It is wrong because it treats Putin’s Russia, the European Union, and the United States as equivalent actors on the world stage – opposites, but equally legitimate – when in actual fact, these countries’ systems of government are profoundly different.  Russia is undemocratic, authoritarian, and endemically corrupt, its natural resources and immense human capital plundered by Putin and his regime.
The European Union, for all its considerable flaws, is a collection of open, liberal, democratic states, respectful of human rights and beholden to the rule of law. A worldview that equates these actors and condemns Ukraine as fated to be split between them in a kind of Solomonic compromise is deeply cynical. Moreover, it is precisely the worldview of Vladimir Putin. And that is not a worldview that we can afford to adopt.
More from CNN: How U.S. should respond to Russia
The protesters on Kiev’s Maidan and across Ukraine’s towns and cities did not brave the cold, the truncheons and the snipers because they have any great love for Brussels, or because they yearn to be in Europe’s “sphere of influence.” They did so because the abrogated association agreement represented an aspiration to turn away from Soviet systems of governance and develop Ukraine’s democratic institutions: an impartial, independent judiciary, a police force that protects its citizens, and an accountable government in which corrupt officials are exposed and punished, rather than allowed rob their people blind.
To Putin, similarly, Ukraine is not so much part of a historic sphere of influence as it is a bulwark against those transformations. Viktor Yanukovych’s inglorious departure exposed to the world how a corrupt leader can amass impossible riches in a bankrupt country where over a quarter of the population lives below the poverty line. The images of his opulence – a gaudy, palatial estate featuring a golf course, a classic car collection and a private zoo – are only a superficial embarrassment compared to what Ukrainian journalists digging through reams of previously secret documents will likely uncover. This is why the protesters came to the Maidan – both from Ukraine’s west and from its “pro-Russian” east. The word for “corruption” in both Ukrainian and Russian, as it turns out, is almost the same.
More from CNN: 5 myths about Ukraine crisis
Naturally, no such public revelations will unfold in Russia while Putin remains in the Kremlin, just as none were possible while the Yanukovych regime was in power. Putin, we know, was watching, and the thought of independent journalists poring through his documents and gawking at his palace in the North Caucasus must be a sobering one. His regime – founded on misinformation, corruption, and naked power – is only a larger and more frightening version of Yanukovych’s. And if it ends, he fears, it will end in the same way.
Both Russia and Ukraine inherited the pathologies of the Soviet Union, which made such grand corruption possible. Only the development of modern democratic institutions can address this, the most fundamental grievance of the post-Soviet world. The struggle to develop these institutions and to make them sustainable is long and difficult – almost impossibly so. Ukraine’s previous pro-Western government, swept into power by the Orange Revolution, failed this challenge. Crucial reforms went unimplemented. Corruption remained endemic. The economy stagnated. And soon enough, this government, too, was swept out of power.
Is Ukraine’s new pro-Western government ready to succeed where its previous one failed? Putin’s goal is almost certainly to ensure that it fails, leaving the country what it was: a small, pathetic clone of his kleptocracy.  To do this, he has sent in Russian troops under laughable pretexts and provocateurs to stir up ethnic nationalism; he has unleashed the full might of his propaganda machine and raised the specter of fascism; he has lauded people waving the Russian tricolor in Ukraine while bundling anti-war protesters waving the same flag in Moscow into police vans. Bringing the Russian police state to Ukraine is not a legitimate exercise of Russia’s influence. It is an aggressive attempt to ensure that the new Ukraine repeats the mistakes of the old.
Yet if Ukraine’s new pro-Western government is ready to succeed, it is incumbent on the West to stand with them, not cower behind a more comfortable and historically palatable pretext. The focus must be not on placating Putin, but on helping Ukraine build institutions that will ensure respect for human rights, a fair market economy, and compliance with international norms. It is not by accommodating the most odious regimes, but by strengthening the most promising, that global liberal democratic norms will be advanced. So that one day, freedom will come not just to Kiev, Donetsk, or Sevastopol – but to Moscow.
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/11/ukraine-crisis-is-not-a-game/

[JayH]

I refferred above to the blind belief some seem to have that is often based on ignorance.Below is article on how some get to stay ignorant.


Cold War Media Tactics Fuel Ukraine Crisis
By CELESTINE BOHLENMARCH 10, 2014

PARIS — One of the fixtures of Cold War propaganda was a map flashed across television screens depicting menacing arrows moving toward the borders of an endangered homeland. The cutaway would be to newsreel footage of missiles being fired, marching soldiers or scenes of devastation from past wars.

In the past week, as the crisis in Crimea deepened, similar images have been running on Russia’s state-run television. Even for the Kremlin’s master propagandists, it is a tenuous stretch — but that’s of no matter. The enemy has been identified: It is the West, allied with “fascist mercenaries” in Ukraine.

The scale of Russia’s propaganda effort in the current crisis has been breathtaking, even by Soviet standards. Facts have been twisted, images doctored (Ukrainians shown as fleeing to Russia were actually crossing the border to Poland), and harsh epithets (neo-Nazis) hurled at the demonstrators in Kiev — who President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia belatedly acknowledged had legitimate gripes against a corrupt and failed government.

If he weren’t the boss, such an open contradiction of the official line, made at a televised news conference, might have been censored.

Like so much about Russia’s actions in Ukraine, the massive propaganda onslaught seems strangely anachronistic in a time when access to the Internet was supposed to undercut the influence of state-controlled media.

It’s all the more puzzling since Russia boasts one of the world’s most active and creative blogospheres, not to mention a thriving community of independent hackers drawn from the same top math schools that feed the ranks of the modern-day successor to the K.G.B.

According to a government-sponsored survey conducted last January, almost half of Russia’s adult population uses the Internet; for those younger than 34, it is the most used medium, ahead of television. Internet penetration in Russia is proportionately lower than in Europe: The same survey found that 38 percent of small towns had no Internet access at all. Still, Russia now ranks among the top six countries in the world for Internet use.


Op-Ed Contributor: The Kremlin’s Social Media TakeoverMARCH 10, 2014
And yet the propaganda campaign seems to be working. Russian public opinion has been whipped into a nationalist fervor over the fate of Crimea, a patch of territory that most Russians regard as rightfully theirs, even after its administrative transfer to Ukraine in 1954. A poll taken on March 1 and 2 by the state-sponsored VCIOM agency showed that 71 percent believe that it is necessary to protect Russian-language speakers in Crimea more vigorously.

The main vehicle for the government’s message is still the main television news, loyally watched in areas at the core of Mr. Putin’s electorate.

Nor is the government ignoring the Internet: Access to 13 Ukrainian websites was blocked this week on VKontacte, Russia’s popular social network. Russia’s top opposition blogger, Alexei A. Navalny, now under house arrest, has been ordered not to use the Internet for two months.

The Internet itself is hardly a guarantor of healthy debate or accurate information. Users often go online to confirm their own views — only to have them amplified by a steady spewing of paranoid and xenophobic diatribes.

Some attitudes, steeped in history, predate the current crisis. A poll taken in 2009 found that 73 percent of Russians endorsed a more vigorous defense of Crimea’s majority Russian population.

Still, Boris Akunin, one of the country’s most popular writers and a member of the opposition with his own blog, is counting on the Internet to loosen the Kremlin’s grip on public debate.

“One shouldn’t confuse two different Russias: telerussia and internetrussia,” he said in an email. “The former is largely uninterested in politics; they eat what they are fed but they are passive politically. The latter Russia is predominantly anti-Putin — precisely due to the free flow of opinions and information on the net.”

He cited a poll, taken in early February, when state-controlled media were just warming up, which showed that 73 percent were against Russian intervention in Ukraine. The question now is how many of those have changed their minds, and why.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/11/world/europe/cold-war-media-tactics-fuel-ukraine-crisis.html

[lordtiberius]

More Americans are more concerned about weed legalization and the Oscars than they are about Ukraine. The country is very anti-war.   On the other hand they do not want to see their country slip behind the likes of Vladimir Putin.  The world has gotten use to American supremacy after decades of decrying its use (thank you for WWII).  But no that we live in a multipolar world who will defend democracy?

[JayH]

LT -I believe that we are now in a similar situation to the early 1990's when the Soviet Union disintegrated.It set up the next 20 years of what will be seen as progress for the world at large ( progess of acceptable standards -life,business,democracy etc_) . Now we are seeing an attempt to turn that clock back-- doing nothing and not confronting this issue now is only going to create a bigger and maybe an unsolveable problem later.
Any weakness shown now-- will be exploited-repeatedly.
Confront the issue now with a show of overwhelming force-- and Putin will not survive the internal politics and Russia will set of in a new acceptable course.

[lordtiberius]

Putin will last a long time with Western enablers.

[steveboy]

In just a few more days Crimea will be a part of Russia! There is NOTHING! anyone can do about it!
The vast majority of people there are RUSSIAN they speak RUSSIAN! It is their choice NOT to become any part of the EU.

As so many say, they do not want to go to the EU to be cooks, cleaners, washer ups and ass wipers at old folks homes in Europe!

It is the same situation in Transnistria , Moldova wants to be in the EU the people from Transnistria do not! Or maybe they should be forced to ?

I have spent many weeks in Crimea and over 18 months living in Transnistria, the people there would rather die!! than become part of the European Union. It is Russian land, Russian blood , hence the war 20 years ago. Nothing will change.

It is the same in Crimea. And all the people who have probably only visited the place 1/2 times if even that have no idea what they are speaking about! It is not as if Russia has invaded a totally different country. Unless you live in Crimea , are Russian or Ukrainian No Westerners really no what they are talking about.
And it is nothing to do with them anyway?

[lordtiberius]

Crimean scum blocking a woman trying to give food to her husband in the barracks:



Note: it is the Russian soldiers who give food to the Ukrainian soldiers.  But the local thugs won't let the soldiers eat food given by their families.

[steveboy]

Same sort of shit happens all over the world! Did you see one of the relatives trying to send a food parcel to an inmate in Guantanamo bay?

Its life, its the modern world we live in

[steveboy]

Its all the poor buggers in these places I feel sorry for((( Not some Ukrainian guard with no cheese sandwich. That is small in the big scale of what is going on today((




http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/poland-reveal-truth-about-secret-cia-detention-site-2013-06-12

[lordtiberius]

Same sort of shit happens all over the world! Did you see one of the relatives trying to send a food parcel to an inmate in Guantanamo bay?

Its life, its the modern world we live in

A Slav and an Arab are not the same thing, agree?

[lordtiberius]

Its all the poor buggers in these places I feel sorry for((( Not some Ukrainian guard with no cheese sandwich. That is small in the big scale of what is going on today((




http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/poland-reveal-truth-about-secret-cia-detention-site-2013-06-12

They won't let him get a gift from his wife.  That's bad joss, no?

[steveboy]

No very different!! Most of the prisoners deserve to be treated like s**** hang them for all I care, if your found in a trench in Afghanistan with a gun , you don't really deserve a trail!!! What ever their excuse. BUT what about the FEW who are innocent?

Where do you draw the line of legality of these detention centres? And a bigger question, why are these places not on US soil?

 8)just saying

[steveboy]

They won't let him get a gift from his wife.  That's bad joss, no?

I will take that guy over a cheese sandwich tomorrow

[lordtiberius]

To the "balanced" members who wish to take a neutral side,

Here's your cluebat to who the good guys and bad guys are:



This is press freedom in Putin's Russia

[Muzh]

No very different!! Most of the prisoners deserve to be treated like s**** hang them for all I care, if your found in a trench in Afghanistan with a gun , you don't really deserve a trail!!! What ever their excuse. BUT what about the FEW who are innocent?

How about a path? Are you allowed to find your own path?