What's new

Russia wanted peace with Ukraine

Piotr

FULL MEMBER
Jun 22, 2016
1,340
-1
3,758
Country
Poland
Location
Poland

Russia wanted peace with Ukraine


by Batko Milacic for the Saker Blog


Ukraine has been firmly in the U.S. geopolitical orbit since violent neo-Nazi protests
in Kyiv’s Maidan Square resulted in the 2014 overthrow of the allegedly pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych. Yet, Russia did not attempt to help the then-Ukrainian leader stay in power. As a result, anti-Russian forces came to power in Kyiv, leading the people of the Donbass region to vote in favor of leaving Ukraine.


In 2014, Russia also recognized the results of the Ukrainian presidential election, organized by the post-Maidan authorities. Mr. Lavrov even called newly elected President Petro Poroshenko the “best chance” for Ukraine. Eight years later, Russia has completely changed its rhetoric on Ukraine.


“I don’t think anyone can claim that the Ukrainian regime, since the 2014 coup d’état, represents all the people living on the territory of the Ukrainian state,” said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on February 22.


The reason for this change in Russian attitude is the acts that the Ukrainian government is committing against Russians and all other citizens who speak Russian in Ukraine. Ukraine waged a kind of “jihad“ against the Russian language and culture.


From January 16, 2020, Ukraine translated all its services into Ukrainian by force of law. So: all shops, cafes and restaurants, banks and pharmacies had to comply with this shameful law. All employees have become obliged to communicate with customers – guests and clients – exclusively in Ukrainian. The Russian language has become completely banned. The mass media also came under attack from Ukrainization. Now, 75 percent of programs on national television are broadcasted in the Ukrainian language, and by 2024, the obligation will be – 90 percent.(1)


All these actions of the Ukrainian government, which have clear elements of fascism, forced pro –Russian forces in Ukraine to react. That is why there were riots in Ukraine with the desire to separate large parts of the territory from Ukraine.


It is clear to all analysts dealing with Ukraine that today`s Ukraine is United States instrument against Russia.


The fact that Kiev received at least $200 million in U.S. “lethal aid” as well as other Western-made weapons over the past two months, means that Kiev rejects a peaceful solution. And Russian President Vladimir Putin has been offering this peaceful solution for years.


Such an operation undoubtedly means war. But war is inevitable, one way or another. Russia has deployed troops to the newly recognized Donbass republics. If Ukrainian forces do not end hostilities, the Russian Army is will to engage in a direct confrontation against Ukrainian army, in order to protect the innocent citizens of DNR and LNR. Sooner or later, the Donbass conflict will escalate. Shelling has increased along the entire front line, which seems to be part of preparations for a military offensive.


That several Western countries have moved their embassies from Kyiv to the western Ukrainian city of Lviv, and that around 10 airlines have canceled their flights to Ukraine, suggests the breakout of war is just a matter of time.


However, the fact that several Western countries have moved their embassies from Kyiv to the western Ukrainian city of Lviv, and that around 10 airlines have canceled their flights to Ukraine, suggests the breakout of war is just a matter of time.


Because of all the above in Moscow a conference was held which was attended by analysts, historians, journalists and political scientists from many countries around the world. A conference was held in the Civil Council of the Russian Federation on the topic: “Eight years of the illegal coup in Ukraine – results and consequences”:



Participants summed up the events around Ukraine, as well as the attitude of the West towards this issue. The round table was opened and moderated by Maxim Grigoriev, a member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, director of the Foundation for Research on Democracy, who began his speech by summarizing the results of eight years since the coup in Kiev.


“The political results of Euromaidan are even sadder than the economic ones,” he said.


“This includes war crimes – deliberate shelling of women and children in Donbas. We see what is happening inside Ukraine, it is the fight against dissidents, when those who do not share the views of the country’s leadership are killed, arrested, kidnapped. This includes the fight against TV channels, including “Ukrainian death squads” – “Azov”, “Right Sector”. They kill dissidents and are trained by the same instructors who prepared “death squads” in Latin America concluded Mr Grigoriev.

http://thesaker.is/russia-wanted-peace-with-ukraine/

As usuall US regime is to blame for problems.
 

Meengla

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 1, 2009
6,059
19
9,896
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Ukraine has been firmly in the U.S. geopolitical orbit since violent neo-Nazi protests in Kyiv’s Maidan Square resulted in the 2014 overthrow of the allegedly pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych. Yet, Russia did not attempt to help the then-Ukrainian leader stay in power. As a result, anti-Russian forces came to power in Kyiv, leading the people of the Donbass region to vote in favor of leaving Ukraine.

A mistake was made by Russia. Should have seen what was to follow after that.
 

Turingsage

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 28, 2014
2,028
-21
3,197
Country
India
Location
United Kingdom
It wanted a puppet regime to be run from Moscow.
Putin's fantasy of recreating a oligarch run version of Soviet Union with none of the saving graces of seeking the unity of the Working class progressing hand in hand.

These are men who stripped the Soviet Union of its wealth and distributed it amongst a group of thieves.
These thieves now run a policy based in nothing more than to grasp and steal as much as they can.
 

V. Makarov

FULL MEMBER
Nov 22, 2013
870
5
2,634
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan

Russia wanted peace with Ukraine


by Batko Milacic for the Saker Blog


Ukraine has been firmly in the U.S. geopolitical orbit since violent neo-Nazi protests
in Kyiv’s Maidan Square resulted in the 2014 overthrow of the allegedly pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych. Yet, Russia did not attempt to help the then-Ukrainian leader stay in power. As a result, anti-Russian forces came to power in Kyiv, leading the people of the Donbass region to vote in favor of leaving Ukraine.


In 2014, Russia also recognized the results of the Ukrainian presidential election, organized by the post-Maidan authorities. Mr. Lavrov even called newly elected President Petro Poroshenko the “best chance” for Ukraine. Eight years later, Russia has completely changed its rhetoric on Ukraine.


“I don’t think anyone can claim that the Ukrainian regime, since the 2014 coup d’état, represents all the people living on the territory of the Ukrainian state,” said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on February 22.


The reason for this change in Russian attitude is the acts that the Ukrainian government is committing against Russians and all other citizens who speak Russian in Ukraine. Ukraine waged a kind of “jihad“ against the Russian language and culture.


From January 16, 2020, Ukraine translated all its services into Ukrainian by force of law. So: all shops, cafes and restaurants, banks and pharmacies had to comply with this shameful law. All employees have become obliged to communicate with customers – guests and clients – exclusively in Ukrainian. The Russian language has become completely banned. The mass media also came under attack from Ukrainization. Now, 75 percent of programs on national television are broadcasted in the Ukrainian language, and by 2024, the obligation will be – 90 percent.(1)


All these actions of the Ukrainian government, which have clear elements of fascism, forced pro –Russian forces in Ukraine to react. That is why there were riots in Ukraine with the desire to separate large parts of the territory from Ukraine.


It is clear to all analysts dealing with Ukraine that today`s Ukraine is United States instrument against Russia.


The fact that Kiev received at least $200 million in U.S. “lethal aid” as well as other Western-made weapons over the past two months, means that Kiev rejects a peaceful solution. And Russian President Vladimir Putin has been offering this peaceful solution for years.


Such an operation undoubtedly means war. But war is inevitable, one way or another. Russia has deployed troops to the newly recognized Donbass republics. If Ukrainian forces do not end hostilities, the Russian Army is will to engage in a direct confrontation against Ukrainian army, in order to protect the innocent citizens of DNR and LNR. Sooner or later, the Donbass conflict will escalate. Shelling has increased along the entire front line, which seems to be part of preparations for a military offensive.


That several Western countries have moved their embassies from Kyiv to the western Ukrainian city of Lviv, and that around 10 airlines have canceled their flights to Ukraine, suggests the breakout of war is just a matter of time.


However, the fact that several Western countries have moved their embassies from Kyiv to the western Ukrainian city of Lviv, and that around 10 airlines have canceled their flights to Ukraine, suggests the breakout of war is just a matter of time.


Because of all the above in Moscow a conference was held which was attended by analysts, historians, journalists and political scientists from many countries around the world. A conference was held in the Civil Council of the Russian Federation on the topic: “Eight years of the illegal coup in Ukraine – results and consequences”:



Participants summed up the events around Ukraine, as well as the attitude of the West towards this issue. The round table was opened and moderated by Maxim Grigoriev, a member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, director of the Foundation for Research on Democracy, who began his speech by summarizing the results of eight years since the coup in Kiev.


“The political results of Euromaidan are even sadder than the economic ones,” he said.


“This includes war crimes – deliberate shelling of women and children in Donbas. We see what is happening inside Ukraine, it is the fight against dissidents, when those who do not share the views of the country’s leadership are killed, arrested, kidnapped. This includes the fight against TV channels, including “Ukrainian death squads” – “Azov”, “Right Sector”. They kill dissidents and are trained by the same instructors who prepared “death squads” in Latin America concluded Mr Grigoriev.

http://thesaker.is/russia-wanted-peace-with-ukraine/

As usuall US regime is to blame for problems.


1647988453111.png
 

Foinikas

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 2, 2021
5,166
2
4,542
Country
Greece
Location
Greece
Zelensky wants WWIII because he couldn't settle for Russia's terms. He didn't want neutrality,he didn't want to be friendly with both Russians and Europe.

But of course,there's also those who pushed Zelensky to provoke Russia. Countries like USA,Britain and Canada.
 

oberschlesier

FULL MEMBER
Mar 5, 2022
322
0
178
Country
Poland
Location
Poland
Russia is fighting with US founded Nazis, not with the Ukraine.
USA killed millions of civilians in countries like Vietnam, Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan.
Yes, not with Ukraine. It seams to be really a lot of those Neo Nazis there. I suppose at least couple of millions, if they fight already one month.
 

Piotr

FULL MEMBER
Jun 22, 2016
1,340
-1
3,758
Country
Poland
Location
Poland
Yes, not with Ukraine. It seams to be really a lot of those Neo Nazis there. I suppose at least couple of millions, if they fight already one month.

Banderites are just few percent, but they use civilians as human shelds.
Cult of Bandera is well known fact. Below one of his monuments in the Ukraine:
Тернопіль_-_Памятник_Степанові_Бандері_-_17017439.jpg
 

oberschlesier

FULL MEMBER
Mar 5, 2022
322
0
178
Country
Poland
Location
Poland
If USA can invade Iraq then Russia can invade the Bandera.
Sure, it can, but it does mean it should.

Like in the Snake Island ?.

More like Kiev, it took 8 days for the Germans in 1939 to march 200km+ , reach Warsaw and they used horses for logistics. You should know this, right ? The Russian army seem to be lead by incompetent people and got stuck in mud couple of days after crossing the border.
 

SalarHaqq

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 29, 2019
2,558
2
4,857
Country
Belgium
Location
Netherlands
Yup, this war is the consequence of sustained and continual provocations by a desperate US regime.

A quick reminder below.

_____

UKRAINE CRISIS: US ‘Toolboxes’ Are Empty​

January 22, 2022

The toolbox is empty. Russia knows this. Biden knows this. Blinken knows this. CNN knows this. The only ones who aren’t aware of this are the American people, says Scott Ritter.

By Scott Ritter

Special to Consortium News

Scott_Ritter_by_David_Shankbone-100x100.jpg


U.S.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, in a hastily scheduled, 90-minute summit in Geneva yesterday, after which both sides lauded the meeting as worthwhile because it kept the door open for a diplomatic resolution to the ongoing crisis in Ukraine. What “keeping the door open” entails, however, represents two completely different realities.

For Blinken, the important thing appears to be process, continuing a dialogue which, by its very essence, creates the impression of progress, with progress being measured in increments of time, as opposed to results.

A results-oriented outcome was not in the books for Blinken and his entourage; the U.S. was supposed to submit a written response to Russia’s demands for security guarantees as spelled out in a pair of draft treaties presented to the U.S. and NATO in December. Instead, Blinken told Lavrov the written submission would be provided next week.

In the meantime, Blinken primed the pump of expected outcomes by highlighting the possibility of future negotiations that addressed Russian concerns (on a reciprocal basis) regarding intermediate-range missiles and NATO military exercises.

But under no circumstances, Blinken said, would the U.S. be responding to Russian demands against NATO expanding to Ukraine and Georgia, and for the redeployment of NATO forces inside the territory of NATO as it existed in 1997.

Blinken also spent a considerable amount of time harping on the danger of a imminent military invasion of Ukraine by Russian forces said to be massing along the Ukraine-Russian border. He pointed out that any military incursion by Russia, not matter what size, that violated the territorial integrity of Ukraine, would be viewed as a continuation of the Russian “aggression” of 2014 and, as such, trigger “massive consequences” which would be damaging to Russia.

Blinken’s restatement of a position he has pontificated on incessantly for more than a month now was not done for the benefit of Lavrov and the Russian government, but rather for an American and European audience which had been left scratching their collective heads over comments made the day before by President Joe Biden which suggested that the U.S. had a range of options it would consider depending on the size of a Russian incursion.

“My guess is he [Russian President Vladimir Putin] will move in, he has to do something,” Biden said during a press briefing on Wednesday. While presenting a Russian invasion as inevitable, Biden went on to note that Putin “will be held accountable” and has “never have seen sanctions like the ones I promised will be imposed” if Russia were, in fact, to move against Ukraine. Biden spoke of deploying additional U.S. military forces to eastern Europe, as well as unspecified economic sanctions.

Biden then, however, hedged his remarks, noting that the scope and scale of any U.S. response would depend on what Russia did. “It’s one thing,” Biden said, “if it’s a minor incursion and we end up having to fight about what to do and not do.”

Almost immediately the Washington establishment went into overdrive to correct what everyone said was a “misstatement” by Biden, with Biden himself making a new statement the next day, declaring that he had been “absolutely clear with President Putin. He has no misunderstanding, any, any assembled Russian units move across the Ukrainian border, that is an invasion,” and that there should be “no doubt at all that if Putin makes this choice, Russia will pay a heavy price.”

And just in case the President was not clear enough, Blinken reiterated that point following his Friday meeting with Lavrov.

Immutable

The U.S. narrative about Russia and Ukraine was immutable; Russia was hell bent on invading, and there would be massive consequences if Russia acted out on its intent. This was no idle threat, Blinken said, but rather represented the unified position of the United States and its allies and partners.

Or was it? In a telling admission, CNN’s White House correspondent, John Harwood, stated that the “minor incursions” statement by Biden was harmless, because (Harwood said) Putin already knew through sources that this was, in fact, the U.S. position. As for Europe and Ukraine, their collective confusion and outrage was merely an act, a posture they had to take for public consumption, since the optics of Biden’s statement “sounds bad.”

In short, the lack of an agreed-upon strategy on how to deal with a Russian incursion/invasion of Ukraine was an open secret for everyone except the U.S. and European publics, who being fed a line of horse manure to assuage domestic political concerns over being seen as surrendering to Russian demands.

Biden and his administration are old hands at lying to the American public when it comes to matters of national security. One only need look to Biden’s July 23, 2021, phone call with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani for a clear precedent into this inability to speak openly and honestly about reality on the ground. “I need not tell you,” Biden told Ghani, “the perception around the world and in parts of Afghanistan, I believe, is that things are not going well in terms of the fight against the Taliban. And there is a need,” Biden added, “whether it is true or not, there is a need to project a different picture.”

This, in a nutshell, is the essence of the posture taken by the Biden administration on Ukraine. Blinken has indicated that the U.S. has a toolbox filled with options that will deliver “massive consequences” to Russia should Russia invade Ukraine. These “tools” include military options, such as the reinforcement of NATO’s eastern flank with additional U.S. troops, and economic options, such as shutting down the NordStream 2 pipeline and cutting Russia off from the SWIFT banking system. All these options, Blinken notes, have the undivided support of U.S. European allies and partners.


Public opening session between Lavrov and Blinken on Friday. (Ruptly screenshot.)

The toolbox is everywhere, it seems—Biden has referred to it, as has White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki. Blinken has alluded to it on numerous occasions.
There’s only one problem—the toolbox, it turns out, is empty.

While the Pentagon is reportedly working on a series of military options to reinforce the existing U.S. military presence in eastern Europe, the actual implementation of these options would neither be timely nor even possible. One option is to move forces already in Europe; the U.S. Army maintains one heavy armored brigade in Europe on a rotational basis and has a light armored vehicle brigade and an artillery brigade stationed in Germany. Along with some helicopter and logistics support, that’s it.

Flooding these units into Poland would be for display purposes only—they represent an unsustainable combat force that would be destroyed within hours, if not days, in any large-scale ground combat against a Russian threat.

The U.S. can deploy a second heavy armored brigade to Poland which would fall in on prepositioned equipment already warehoused on Polish soil. This brigade would suffer a similar fate if matched up against the Russian army. The U.S. can also deploy an airborne brigade. They, too, would die.

There are no other options available to deploy additional U.S. heavy forces to Europe on a scale and in a timeframe that would be meaningful. The problem isn’t just the deployment of forces from their bases in the U.S. (something that would takes months to prepare for), but the sustainability of these forces once they arrived on the ground in Europe. Food, ammunition, water, fuel—the logistics of war is complicated, and not resolved overnight.

In short, there is no viable military option, and Biden knows this.

Empty Sanctions Too

The U.S. has no sanctions plan that can survive initial contact with the enemy, which in this case is the collective weakness of the post-pandemic economies of both Europe and the U.S.; the over-reliance of Europe on Russian-sourced energy, and the vulnerability of democratically elected leaders to the whim of a consumer-based constituency. Russia can survive the impact of any sanctions regime the U.S. is able to scrape together—even those targeting the Russian banking system—far longer than Europe can survive without access to Russian energy.

This is a reality that Europe lives with, and while U.S. policy makers might think hard-hitting sanctions look good on paper, the reality is that whatever passes for U.S.-European unity today would collapse in rapid order when the Russian pipelines were shut down. The pain would not just be limited to Europe, either—the U.S. economy would suffer as well, with sky-high fuel prices and a stock market collapse that would put the U.S. into an economic recession, if not outright depression.

The political cost that would be incurred by Biden and, by extension, the Democrats, would be fatal to any hope that might remain for holding onto either house of Congress in 2022, or the White House in 2024. It would be one thing if Biden and his national security team were honest and forthright about the real consequences of declaring the equivalent of economic war on Russia. It is another thing altogether to speak only of the pain sanctions would cause Russia, with little thought, if any, to the real consequences that will be paid on the home front.

Americans should never forget that Russia has been laboring under severe U.S. sanctions since 2014, with zero effect. Russia knows what could be coming and has prepared. The American people wallow in their ignorance, believing at face value what they are told by the Biden administration, and echoed by a compliant mainstream media.

Propaganda About ‘Propaganda’

One of the great ironies of the current crisis is that, on the eve of the Blinken-Lavrov meeting in Geneva, the U.S. State Department published a report on Russian propaganda, decrying the role played by state-funded outlets such as RT and Sputnik in shaping public opinion in the United States and the West (in the interest of full disclosure, RT is one of the outlets that I write for.)

The fact that the State Department would publish such a report on the eve of a meeting which is all about propagating the big lie—that the U.S. has a plan for deterring “irresponsible Russian aggression”—while ignoring the hard truth: this is a crisis derived solely from the irresponsible policies of the U.S. and NATO over the past 30 years.

While a compliant mainstream American media unthinkingly repeated every warning and threat issued by Biden and Blinken to Russia over the course of the past few days, the Russian position has been largely ignored. Here’s a reminder of where Russia stands on its demands for security guarantees: “We are talking about the withdrawal of foreign forces, equipment, and weapons, as well as taking other steps to return to the set-up we had in 1997 in non-NATO countries,” the Russian Foreign Ministry declared in a bulletin published after the Lavrov-Blinken meeting. “This includes Bulgaria and Romania.”

Blinken has already said the U.S. will reject this.

The toolbox is empty. Russia knows this. Biden knows this. Blinken knows this. CNN knows this. The only ones who aren’t aware of this are the American people.

The consequences of a U.S. rejection of Russia’s demands will more than likely be war.

If you think the American people are ready to bear the burden of a war with Russia, think again.

Scott Ritter is a former U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD.

 

Viet

ELITE MEMBER
Jun 18, 2012
26,267
0
18,958
Country
Viet Nam
Location
Germany
Russia is fighting with US founded Nazis, not with the Ukraine.
USA killed millions of civilians in countries like Vietnam, Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan.
Please don’t bring Vietnam war here to justify war of aggression against Ukraine, idiot.
 

Daylamite Warrior

FULL MEMBER
Sep 30, 2021
161
-2
188
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
So what ? Does this means Russia can invade Ukraine? Those few percent seem to give a beating to the Russian army.
Yes if there are neonazis killing ethnic Russians in Ukraine then it would be a crime for Russia not invading Ukraine. What beating is that? Ukraine has already lost the east and this war will continue for a very long time.

Please don’t bring Vietnam war here to justify war of aggression against Ukraine, idiot.
It's actually a decent comparison and shows the hypocrisy of the west. Why not bring up Vietnam?

If USA can invade Iraq then Russia can invade the Bandera.
Dont speak so much sence and logic, people get offended here lol
 

Broccoli

FULL MEMBER
Jan 14, 2011
1,119
2
942
Country
Finland
Location
Finland
I gathered from the comments that few thousands Ukrainian neo-nazis are giving a spanking for Russian military what is supposedly almost as powerful as United States. Interesting.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom