‘US troop buildup in E. Europe symbolic gesture to Russia over Ukraine’

Reuters/Jo Yong-Hak

Reuters/Jo Yong-Hak

 

… for the moment I think the thing is how you are going to react as a country. Let’s not forget that when you say “react[tion] from Russia,” Russia’s territory borders these countries. So whatever they do is moving military forces within its own country, this is not as if the Russians are building up forces in the Gulf of Mexico. So we should put things in prospective…The Western side are the ones who are building up tension, let’s not forget that. But yes, the tension is [increasing] and this is not going to help in anyway.~ former senior adviser to OSCE Lode Vanoost

 

October 03, 2014 

RT News

The US buildup in the Baltic States and Poland is not exactly the force that will protect these countries or stop an invasion from whomever, so it is a symbolic gesture and a message to Russia, former senior adviser to OSCE Lode Vanoost told RT.

The US is deploying troops to Poland and the Baltic states. Around 700 soldiers, 20 battle tanks and a number of mechanized vehicles will arrive in the coming weeks. This move is a part of Operation Atlantic Resolve which is NATO’s response to what the alliance calls Russia’s “aggression” in Ukraine.

RT: This is one of the largest deployments of US forces in Eastern Europe. What message does America want to send?

Lode Vanoost: First of all, I think this is a message from the President [Barack Obama] to his own backyard, to the more conservative elements in the Congress to say “Look, at least I’m doing something.” It’s also a message to geopolitical allies in Eastern Europe, the ones that are most pro-Western within these countries. And this is of course a message to Russia. Even though it’s quite substantial compared to what was in the past, it’s still a symbolic gesture. Let’s not forget that even with this buildup this is not exactly the force that will so-called protect four countries or stop invasion from whatever.

RT:Both ground troops and tanks are being deployed. Is there a real chance they could see action?

LV: I don’t think so. Whenever you say the things about the future you should always be careful of course, because the risk of something going badly wrong inadvertently is always bigger when you have this kind of deployment. I think this is saber-rattling and showing some muscle, but it’s merely a symbolic gesture towards Russia.

RT: How do you think Russia should respond to this troop build-up?

LV: I think they should keep the same restraint as they did for the last months. They should, first of all, point out that their policy towards Poland and the Baltic states for the last years has never changed, and that whatever happened in Ukraine has nothing to do with the relations they have with these countries. This is just a buildup of forces on the other side to hide that things in Ukraine are not going according to the Western plan.

RT:How will sending American troops to Eastern Europe affect the stand-off between Russia and the West? Will it somehow help to resolve crisis in Ukraine?

LV: This is not going to improve things, certainly not. But for the moment I think the thing is how you are going to react as a country. Let’s not forget that when you say “react[tion] from Russia,” Russia’s territory borders these countries. So whatever they do is moving military forces within its own country, this is not as if the Russians are building up forces in the Gulf of Mexico. So we should put things in prospective…The Western side are the ones who are building up tension, let’s not forget that. But yes, the tension is [increasing] and this is not going to help in anyway.

 

Breaking News: Kiev used ballistic missiles in E Ukraine NATO confirms to DW

In the past two days Kiev’s forces have launched several short-range ballistic missiles into areas in east Ukraine controlled by self-defense forces, CNN reports, citing US government sources.

The move “marks a major escalation” in the Ukrainian crisis, CNN said.

“Three US officials confirmed to me a short time ago that US intelligence over the last 48 hours has monitored the firing of several short-range ballistic missiles from territory controlled by Ukraine government forces into areas controlled by the pro-Russian separatists,” Barbara Starr, CNN’s Pentagon correspondent, said in a live report.

Short-range ballistic missiles can carry warheads of up to 1,000 pounds (450 kg) and are capable of killing dozens of people at a time, Starr said.

A Moscow correspondent for another American television network, ABC, tweeted Tuesday that the Kiev forces fired three ballistic missiles at self-defense forces near the town of Snezhnoe (Snizhne in Ukrainian) in the Donetsk Region. According to Kirit Radia, this is what a US official told ABC’s Pentagon digital journalist Luis Martinez.

Kirit Radia ✔ @KiritRadia
Follow

In last 48 hours Ukraine’s military fired 3 SS21 short range ballistic missiles at separatists near Snizhne, US official tells @LMartinezABC
1:53 PM – 29 Jul 2014

Radia added that according to the official, it is likely that Ukrainian forces use such missiles since they do not want to risk their planes being shot down by sending them to the area.

More: US official says Ukrainian mil likely using those weapons bc they dont want to risk sending planes to be shot down, per @LMartinezABC

The coalition show, from Afghanistan to ‘Syraq’ – By Pepe Escobar

An Islamic State militant (L) stands next to residents as they hold pieces of wreckage from a Syrian war plane after it crashed in Raqqa, in northeast Syria September 16, 2014. (Reuters/Stringer)

An Islamic State militant (L) stands next to residents as they hold pieces of wreckage from a Syrian war plane after it crashed in Raqqa, in northeast Syria September 16, 2014. (Reuters/Stringer)

Published: September 23, 2014 15:26

By Pepe Escobar

Pepe Escobar is the roving correspondent for Asia Times/Hong Kong, an analyst for RT and TomDispatch, and a frequent contributor to websites and radio shows ranging from the US to East Asia.

US Secretary of State Kerry brokered a deal in Afghanistan, installing a ‘coalition’ government, but couldn’t come up with a credible coalition to bomb IS in Syria. So the Pentagon will do it alone to the applause of its Gulf ‘petrodollar allies.’

This is a short tale of two coalitions.

Let’s start with Afghanistan. The charade in Kabul goes by the name of “power-sharing agreement.”

You got an election problem? Call John Kerry. That’s right; this “agreement” was brokered by none other than the US Secretary of State, who shoved the embarrassing issue of a tainted democratic election under an Afghan carpet.

It came to the point that a UN representative, Jan Kubish, virtually ordered the Afghan electoral commission not to release vote numbers.

And this is while the UN itself had been monitoring an audit and a recount of approximately 8 million votes.

The predictable “senior US officials” spun that the vote result was “transparent.” But still, no numbers.

So now we have – essentially appointed by Washington – former Finance Minister and World Bank official Ashraf Ghani as President, and Dr. Abdullah Abdullah as “Chief Executive”, a new post.

And this after Abdullah insistently claimed the vote results were no less than a monster fraud. US “Think Tank-land,” unfazed, has called it a “temporary fix.”

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry (Reuters/Gary Cameron)

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry (Reuters/Gary Cameron)

Now for the all-important breakdown: NATO top honcho Gen. Philip Breedlove said Saturday in Lithuania that both “power-sharers” swore on their lives they will “quickly” sign a security agreement with Washington.

This agreement was brokered, once again, by Kerry and outgoing President Hamid Karzai in late 2013 – and approved by Afghanistan’s Loya Jirga. Karzai though had refused to sign.

Short translation: at least 10,000 American troops – mostly Special Forces – will remain deployed in Afghanistan in Enduring Freedom Forever mode. This is a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) by any other name.

So the occupation continues. Not only with US troops, but also with NATO starting a “training mission” in January 2015 called Resolute Support.

Watch out for major, certified blowback. It’s a no-brainer the Taliban will keep showing Resolute Support to kick NATO and the US’s collective behind.

But that’s great. That’s exactly what the never-ending GWOT (Global War on Terror) is all about.

When in doubt, bomb everybody

Now for the coalition to fight Caliph Ibrahim, the self-appointed beheading prophet of ISIS/ISIL/IS in “Syraq”.

US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power has been on a roll ahead of the UN summit this week in New York.

She frantically spun there are over 40 countries in the coalition of the reluctantly willing assembled to fight the Caliph.

But she won’t name them – or detail what they will be doing.

What she does know is that this new GWOT chapter will last “several years.”

Power also ruled out any collaboration with “rogue” Iran. But she was forced to admit that Russia has a role in fighting the Caliph.

Now that’s groundbreaking. Until virtually yesterday, for the Obama administration Russia was the “evil empire” remixed.

Moscow did warn that, “bombing Syria without the cooperation of Damascus can have destructive practical consequences on the humanitarian situation in Syria.”

Once again, the clearest Power got was to specify that, “we will not do the airstrikes alone if the President decides to do the airstrikes.”

People view the debris of their homes after a Syrian war plane crashed in Raqqa, in northeast Syria September 16, 2014. (Reuters/Stringer)

People view the debris of their homes after a Syrian war plane crashed in Raqqa, in northeast Syria September 16, 2014. (Reuters/Stringer)

And once again, John Kerry stole the show. For him, it’s not 40, but “some 50” countries who are barely containing themselves to go Caliph-hunting.

Kerry, to his credit, and unlike Power, at least is now saying that Iran may “have a role” after all.

For his part, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi made it clear that any strategy that undermines the Syrian government “will be a recipe for defeat.”

And Russia’s ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin demolished US President Barack Obama’s strategy to train and weaponize Washington’s mythical “moderate” Syrian rebels.

Even China’s ambassador to the UN Liu Jieyi carefully weighed in: “The international community should respect the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the countries in question.”

Kabul was a piece of cake. Kerry just had to offer a decent bribe. But that won’t fly with the Caliph business.

Washington refuses to cooperate with Damascus and coordinate with Tehran – especially after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei vetoed it, and President Rouhani blasted Obama’s strategy as “ridiculous.”

Meanwhile Turkey, a NATO ally, is screaming, “The Syrian regime is the patron of extremism,” in the words of Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu.

Kerry at least does not need to bribe Haider al-Abadi, the new Iraqi Prime Minister. After all Washington already bagged its Mesopotamian regime change, getting rid of Nouri al-Maliki.

Al-Abadi decided not to bomb Sunni regions in Iraq. Yet most of the Caliph’s resources and goons are actually in Syria.

Call the French fry guy

The Pentagon, not to be unfazed, carefully prepared a “mini-Shock and Awe” in Syria and started in style this Monday, launching a barrage of Tomahawk missiles on Raqqa.

“General” Hollande in France has been eager to join. With his popularity numbers glamorously flirting with zero, deploying Rafales against the bad guys is the only game in town for him.

Now compare it with Germany, as Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier insisted that air support or ground troops are “out of the question for us.”

It’s hard to see Kerry bribing Steinmeier. So what’s left is a coalition of two: Washington and Paris.

And it’s only in Iraq, because “General” Hollande already said bombing Syria is out.

The breakdown: bombing Syria will be via a coalition of the Pentagon with the Pentagon.

And this while Arab “diplomats” – as in the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) petrodollar gang – keep insisting the Pentagon should in fact bomb not only the Caliph’s goons but also Bashar al-Assad’s forces.

Which is what the Pentagon will “secretly” have in mind anyway.

Everyone remembers Obama’s red line last year when he threatened to bomb Damascus for “gassing its own people” just for Moscow to have him back off at the eleventh hour.

Now Obama could fulfill his dream via a “leading from behind” bombing.

Will the petrodollar gang also attack? Of course not. They will be applauding from the sidelines.

And for the doubters, there will always be Obama’s national security adviser, Susan Rice, spinning “this will be a unified coalition…It will be cohesive. And it will be under one single command authority.”

The Pentagon commanding the Pentagon. What could possibly go wrong?

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Aftermath Footage: Overnight anti-ISIS airstrikes devastate village in Syria (New Video)

New anti-ISIS airstrike in Syria, 4 more in Iraq – Pentagon

8 civilians, incl. 3 children, killed in US-led strikes on Syria – monitor

Residents look at buildings which were damaged in what activists say was one of Tuesday's U.S. air strikes in Kfredrian, Idlib province September 24, 2014 (Reuters / Ammar Abdullah)

Residents look at buildings which were damaged in what activists say was one of Tuesday’s U.S. air strikes in Kfredrian, Idlib province September 24, 2014 (Reuters / Ammar Abdullah)

US military has confirmed that the US-led coalition have launched five airstrikes on the Islamic State militants – one of them hit the Syrian territory, while four others hit Iraq.

“Two airstrikes west of Baghdad destroyed two ISIL armed vehicles and a weapons cache. Two airstrikes southeast of Irbil destroyed ISIL fighting positions. A fifth airstrike damaged eight ISIL vehicles in Syria northwest of Al Qa’im. All aircraft exited the strike areas safely,” the US Central Command said in a statement on Wednesday.

Pentagon officials told NBC News that that the airstrike northwest of Al Qaim damaged eight vehicles linked to the Islamic militants. The strikes in Iraq west of Baghdad targeted two vehicles and a weapons cache, while the terrorists’ “fighting positions” were hit southeast of Erbil.

The main target of the strikes was an area used by the Islamic States (formerly known as ISIS/ISIL) militants to move equipment from Syria across the border into Iraq, Rear Adm. John Kirby also told.

 

 

Various attack, bomber and fighter aircraft were used for the strikes, and all aircraft were able to leave the area unharmed afterward.

Earlier in the day, Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported airstrikes in and around the eastern Syrian city of Boukamal. The head of UK-based organization Rami Abdulrahman said the strikes also hit the territory 30-35 kilometers to the west of the strategic city of Kobani. He added that military planes that conducted attacks came from the direction of Turkey and were not Syrian.

In the fight against the extremist militants in Syria and Iraq, the US-led coalition will will not only use ongoing strikes, but also foreign fighters, cutting off financing, and a major effort to “reclaim Islam by Muslims,” US Secretary of State John Kerry told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour on Wednesday.

The US and its allies have vowed to combat the IS militants, who have been on the rampage in parts of war-torn Syria and Iraq. The anti-IS coalition, led by the US, was joined by nearly 40 nations including five Arab nations – Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

The first attacks in Syria were launched on Tuesday with 30 militants allegedly killed in the airstrikes. Syria has repeatedly warned that any action on its territory needs the government’s approval and has said it is willing to work with any country to tackle the IS militants.

“Any action of any type without the approval of Syrian government is an aggression against Syria,” Ali Haidar, minister of national reconciliation affairs, told reporters in Damascus earlier in September.

“There must be cooperation with Syria and coordination with Syria and there must be a Syrian approval of any action whether it is military or not.”

Moscow joined Damascus by stating that Washington should respect the sovereignty of Syria in its attempts to deal with the Islamists in the region.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Sunday that there is need for “strict adherence to the UN Charter and international law as well as unconditional respect for Syrian sovereignty during the implementation of plans by the US-led coalition, which includes the use of force.”

On Wednesday, Moscow questioned the effectiveness of the airstrikes, saying that it was a “controversial” issue.

“The specific context of the events still raises serious questions,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement. “First of all, the United States and the West in general for some reason chose to ignore the terrorist nature of the Islamic State, when the militants fought only with government troops in Syria.”

The ministry added that “despite the loud statements about the campaign’s ‘successes,’ the IS terrorists continue to block the Kurdish town of Kobani [Ayn al-Arab] in northeast Syria. In the event of its capture, the inhabitants will obviously be brutally repressed, if not completely annihilated.”

Meanwhile, a Syrian government minister said that the fight against IS militants is going in “right direction“, as Damascus has been kept informed.

What has happened so far is proceeding in the right direction in terms of informing the Syrian government and by not targeting Syrian military installations and not targeting civilians,” Ali Haidar, minister for national reconciliation, told Reuters on Wednesday.

strike

Bombing ‘imminent threat’: US justifies strikes without ‘direct request’ from Syria

A still image captured from U.S. Navy video footage shows a Tomahawk Land-Attack Missile (TLAM) is launched against ISIL targets from the guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea in the Arabian Gulf, September 23, 2014. (Reuters / Abe McNatt / U.S. Navy / Handout)

A still image captured from U.S. Navy video footage shows a Tomahawk Land-Attack Missile (TLAM) is launched against ISIL targets from the guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea in the Arabian Gulf, September 23, 2014. (Reuters / Abe McNatt / U.S. Navy / Handout)

The UN chief is “aware” that the Syrian government did not directly “request” airstrikes on terrorist targets on their soil and urged all parties involved in the US-led anti-ISIS campaign to take all necessary precautions to minimize civilian casualties.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said he is “aware” that the US-led intrusion and airstrikes on Islamic State targets were not carried out “at the direct request of the Syrian Government,” in a statement delivered at a climate summit press conference.

However, he noted that Damascus “was informed beforehand” and that the strikes took place in “areas no longer under the effective control” of the government.

“I regret the loss of any civilian lives as a result of strikes against targets in Syria. The parties involved in this campaign must abide by international humanitarian law and take all necessary precautions to avoid and minimize civilian casualties,” the UN chief added.

In a letter to the UN secretary general, US Ambassador Samantha Power used Article 51 of the UN charter to justify air strikes against ISIS targets in Syria, claiming that it was necessary to protect civilians and secure Iraq’s borders.

The US explained that Iraq has “made it clear” that it faces a “serious” threat from the Islamic State militants coming from Syria, a country which Washington says offers “safe havens” for militants.

“These safe havens are used by ISIL (ISIS) for training, planning, financing, and carrying out attacks across Iraqi borders and against Iraq’s people,” the letter reads.

It is because of this threat and at the request of the Iraqi government that the US decided to lead a coalition against Islamic State positions in Syria, “in order to end the continuing attacks on Iraq,” to protect civilians and help Baghdad secure state borders.

Washington_ByP_FBfIAAEvqqP

Letter from White House to UN justifying action against #ISIS in #Iraq and #Syria under Article 51:

 

Stating that IS poses a dire threat both to the region as well as to the security of the United States, Powers writes that Article 51 of the UN charter provides countries the right to engage in self-defense, including collective self-defense, against an armed attack.

“As is the case here, the government of the State where the threat is located is unwilling or unable to prevent the use of its territory for such attacks,” the letter, dated September 23, reads.

It argues that strikes against ISIS in Syria are justified as the Syrian regime “cannot and will not confront these safe havens effectively itself.”

“Accordingly, the United States has initiated necessary and proportionate military actions in Syria in order to eliminate the ongoing ISIL threat to Iraq.”

In addition, Washington is also conducting military action against Al-Qaeda “elements in Syria known as the Khorasan Group,” which it believes could be responsible for plotting against America and its allies.

The air campaign against the Khorasan extremists was separate from the one targeting the Islamic State group, as the US believes they were close to carrying out “major attacks” against the West.

 

This US Navy photo shows an an F/A-18E Super Hornet, attached to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 31, and an F/A-18F Super Hornet, attached to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 213, as they prepare to launch from the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77)to conduct strike missions against ISIL targets on September 23, 2014 in the Gulf. (AFP Photo / US Navy / Robert Burck / Habdout)

This US Navy photo shows an an F/A-18E Super Hornet, attached to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 31, and an F/A-18F Super Hornet, attached to Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 213, as they prepare to launch from the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77)to conduct strike missions against ISIL targets on September 23, 2014 in the Gulf. (AFP Photo / US Navy / Robert Burck / Habdout)

“Intelligence reports indicated that the group was in the final stages of plans to execute major attacks against Western targets and potentially the US homeland,” announced Lt. Gen. William Mayville, director of operations for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff.

He specified that the group is “establishing roots in Syria in order to advance attacks against the West and the homeland.”

Calling the strikes “successful,” Mayville also announced that more than 40 Tomahawk missiles were launched from the Gulf and the Red Sea, saying “the majority of the Tomahawk strikes were against Khorasan.”

Earlier in the day, US President Barack Obama said that he ordered the strikes in Syria to “disrupt plotting against the United States and our allies by seasoned al-Qaeda operatives in Syria, who are known as the Khorasan Group”.

“Once again, it must be clear to anyone who would plot against America and try to do Americans harm that we will not tolerate safe havens for terrorists who threaten our people,” he added.

However, the US airstrikes will not be “effective, if there is no coordination of actions on the ground and if no ground military operations are carried out,” Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moualem told RT Arabic.

“The US is mocking the whole world when they say that they are going to coordinate their actions not with the Syrian government, but with the moderate Syrian opposition. This is funny. What moderate opposition are you talking about?” Moualem told RT Arabic. “This moderate opposition is killing Syrians just like al-Nusra or ISIS.”

If the US “seriously wanted to fight the ISIS and other terrorist organizations,” there would be an international organization under the aegis of the UN, in which all countries would participate, Moualem said.

 

 

 

 

 

Ukraine used phosphorous incendiaries, cluster bombs against cities – Russian military

Aftermath of an artillery attack by the Ukrainian army on the Artyom district in Slavyansk. (AFP Photo / Andrey Stenin)

Aftermath of an artillery attack by the Ukrainian army on the Artyom district in Slavyansk. (AFP Photo / Andrey Stenin)

Ukrainian troops have on many occasions used incendiary weapons and cluster bombs against militia-held cities, acts that are banned under the international law regulating warfare, the Russian military said.

The accusation was voiced on Friday by Major General Viktor Poznikhir, the deputy commander of the chief operations branch of the Russian General Staff. Earlier some media reports claimed that munitions, which are not allowed to be used against civilian targets, were used in eastern Ukraine by the Kiev troops in their assault on armed militias.

According to the general, the Russian military are certain of a number of such attacks by Ukrainian troops. Those include artillery shelling with incendiary shells on June 12 in Slavyansk, on June 24 and June 29 in Semyonovka and on July 7 in Lisichansk. There were also air strikes with incendiary bombs on June 21 in Slavyansk and Kramatorsk and on July 23 in Donetsk and shelling with cluster shells on June 24 in Semyonovka.

 

 

“We have sufficient proof that in the cities and villages of Ukraine I mentioned, ammunition based on phosphorus was used,” Poznikhir said. In all those instances characteristic fast-falling clusters of sparks were spotted in the air and massive fires on the ground were reported, proving that those were not illumination flares.

The evidence behind the ministry’s assessment includes eyewitness accounts, injuries sustained by the victims of the attacks and media reports from Ukraine, the Russian general said.

“The incendiaries were used against residential areas where only civilians were present at the time,” Poznikhir stressed. “We believe the Ukrainian side wanted to produce a demoralizing effect on the people and inflict serious damage to communal infrastructure, which would create the conditions for a humanitarian disaster.”

Most of the incidents mentioned by the general happened in or near Slavyansk, once the most defended strongholds of the Ukrainian militia, which for two months held out against the siege by Ukrainian troops. The city was eventually abandoned by militia forces, which regrouped and fortified other Ukrainian cities. Those are currently under Ukrainian attack.

The use of incendiary weapons against civilians or military objects located in civilian areas is forbidden by Protocol III of the UN Convention on Conventional Weapons. Ukraine is a signatory to the protocol. Cluster munitions are prohibited by the Convention on Cluster Munitions, but Ukraine did not ratify that agreement.

 

 

 

 

Ukraine nationalist leader calls on ‘most wanted’ terrorist Umarov ‘to act against Russia’

ARCHIVE PHOTO: Dmytro Yarosh (L), a leader of the Right Sector movement, addresses during a rally in central Independence Square in Kiev February 21, 2014 (Reuters / David Mdzinarishvili)

ARCHIVE PHOTO: Dmytro Yarosh (L), a leader of the Right Sector movement, addresses during a rally in central Independence Square in Kiev February 21, 2014 (Reuters / David Mdzinarishvili)

A leader of the Ukrainian radical group Pravy Sektor (Right Sector), Dmitry Yarosh, has called on Russia’s most wanted terrorist Doku Umarov to act against Russia in an address posted on Right Sector’s page in VKontakte social network.

The statement points out that “many Ukrainians with arms in the hands” supported Chechen militants in their fight against Russians and “it is time to support Ukraine now.”

The message, signed “leader of Right Sector Dmitry Yarosh” then calls on Umarov “to activate his fight” and “take a unique chance to win” over Russia.

Yarosh leads the far-right militant Right Sector group and used to be a leader of radical nationalist group Trident, which became the core of the Right Sector.

Yarosh attended the February 21st political gathering at the renamed Independence Square shortly after the signing of the deal that returned the country to the 2004 constitution. He shared the stage with virtually all of Ukraine’s prominent opposition politicians, including former superstar boxer and leader of the Democratic Alliance for Reform, Vitaliy Klitschko. In the following video, surrounded by masked units from his far-right following, he declares victory and vows to continue fighting, as the crowd cheers in a military fashion.

 

Правий сектор не складе зброї – Ярош

 

 

The radical leader has been consistently anti-Russian in his statements, calling for the destruction and division of the “Moscow Empire” and openly supporting Chechen militants and Georgian aggression. Yarosh believes Russia is Ukraine’s “eternal foe” and has said that war between the two countries is “inevitable.”

Aside from his beliefs on Russia, the Right Sector leader believes Ukraine should be “careful” with its future EU membership, as the “bureaucratic monster of Brussels” is “doing everything to bring to naught the national identity” of EU member countries.

Yarosh’s outrageous plea to terrorist Doku Umarov exhibits the “guts of the so-called new Ukrainian authorities,”Chairman of the Presidium of the Russian Congress of Peoples of the Caucasus told Itar-Tass.

“Extremists, nationalists of all stripes, flooded the peaceful republic threatening it with chaos and violence,” Aliy Totorkulov said.

Even the fact of Yarosh’s address, whose “hands are stained with blood” shows that the Ukraine’s extreme right“Maidan sponsors” and the forces supporting the instability in Caucasus come from a “single-center” of extremism, Totorkulov stressed.

“We strongly support the deployment of Russian troops to resolve the situation in Crimea as well as provide assistance to other Ukrainian regions, where the population rejects nationalism and asks [Russia] for help and protection.”

During the recent riots in Ukraine, Yarosh rejected any negotiations with the Ukrainian government, calling on his supporters to defy the truces and agreements of the government and the opposition.

The Right Sector has been referred to as the most active, the most radical and the best organized group in the Ukrainian unrest. Well-equipped masked rioters from Right Sector often used clubs, petrol bombs and firearms against the Ukrainian police. Some notorious members of the radical movement have continued to use rifles and pistols to intimidate local authorities, which they believe should be “afraid” of the people.

Although the violent acts of the group have been well-documented by media and placed on YouTube, Western powers have largely ignored its actions and persisted with describing the protests in Ukraine as “peaceful.” After meeting with Ukrainian protesters, including Right Sector members, in late January, Western representatives went as far as saying that they were “convinced that these people posed no threat.”

The Russian Foreign Ministry’s commissioner for human rights Konstantin Dolgov said that Moscow awaits the West’s reaction to Yarosh’s appeal to Umarov.

“The Ukrainian neo-fascist Yarosh has appealed to terrorist Umarov,” Dolgov wrote on Twitter. “Does the West place their stake on such Ukrainian ‘democrats’? Will they react to this?”

Far-right group "Right Sector" train in Independence Square in Kiev January 31, 2014. (Reuters/David Mdzinarishvili)

Far-right group “Right Sector” train in Independence Square in Kiev January 31, 2014. (Reuters/David Mdzinarishvili)

Umarov, who commanded groups of militants in both Chechen wars and organized several large terror acts, is the most wanted terrorist in Russia. Umarov has claimed responsibility for several attacks on Russian civilians, including the 2010 Moscow Metro bombings and the 2011 Domodedovo International Airport bombing, which killed dozens of people and injured hundreds.

In March 2011, Umarov was put on the UN Security Council’s Al-Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions Committee list of individuals. The US government has also announced a $5 million reward for information leading to the terrorist leader’s capture.

The self-proclaimed ‘Emir of the Caucasus Emirate’ routinely recorded video addresses, in which he incited terror attacks against Russian government forces and civilians. He last appeared alive in a video posted on the internet in summer 2013, calling to step up terrorist activities and thwart the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics. Umarov’s long absence led rumors of his death to spread, but so far this has not been officially confirmed.

Meanwhile the social media page of the Right Sector group, where the message has been posted, was taken down as it has violated company’s policies by posting prohibited content. The VKontakte page now states that the “community has been blocked at the request of Roskomnadzor as it has been added to the register of prohibited content.”

The Right Sector social media VKontakte page had over 375,000 followers and was used for coordinating the actions of the movement’s cells across Ukraine.

After the outrageous message caught the attention of world media, a Right Sector representative has claimed that the movement has nothing to do with the posting and that one of their administrator’s accounts was “hacked.”

Screenshot from Right Sector's Vkontakte page

 

 

 

 

You give love a bad name, bad name…

Poroshenko to US Congress: "Ukraine like Israel have a right to defend itself..."

Petro Poroshenko to US Congress: “Ukraine like Israel has a right to defend itself…”

 

RT news

Published time: September 22, 2014 11:29

 

Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko addresses a joint meeting of Congress in the U.S. Capitol in Washington, September 18, 2014. (Reuters/Kevin Lamarque)

Moscow is bewildered by Washington’s warmongering rhetoric, which accompanied President Petro Poroshenko’s visit to the US. Russia has also noted all the Russia-unfriendly opinions voiced recently by hawkish American politicians.

“We’ll keep in mind all signals, including those unfriendly towards Russia, that were heard during the visit of the Ukrainian president to Washington,” commented Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov. “We do regret that there are quite influential circles [within the American establishment] that are unambiguously working against the emerging stabilization [in Ukraine],” Ryabkov said.

In short, US senators urged to supply Ukraine with arms to fight against Russia and President Putin.

Senator Robert Mendez, a Democrat who runs the Foreign Relations Committee told CNN, “We should provide the Ukrainians with the type of defensive weapons that will impose a cost upon Putin for further aggression.

“This is no longer the question of some rebel separatists. This is a direct invasion by Russia. We must recognize it as that,” he said.

In turn, Senator John McCain told CBS’s Face the Nation that President Putin was “an old KGB colonel that wants to restore the Russian Empire.”

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Senator Mike Rogers, told Fox News, “If we don’t provide ‘small and effective’ now, you’re going to get ‘very big and very ugly’ later.”

The Russian politician pointed out that peaceful initiatives agreed upon in Minsk by the Contact Group on Ukraine are at odds with statements made during President Poroshenko’s visit to the US.

“It strengthens us in the opinion that the so-called party of war is strong not only in Kiev,” Ryabkov said, adding that some high-ranking American officials and politicians are willfully ignoring any positive outlook for resolving the crisis in Ukraine.

“They are hypocritically advocating normalization of the situation, while actually impeding this process,” Ryabkov said.

‘We’ve got everything we need’ – Poroshenko

In interviews to national US TV channels, President Poroshenko said the American president had verbally confirmed that Ukraine now enjoys the “uppermost status” among US military partner states, which are not NATO members.
Poroshenko said that the non-lethal supplies promised by the US and other states are sufficient and would help to restore the Ukrainian army to battle-ready status.

“We will receive and have already received everything we need: surveillance, radar, and supervisory and other defensive equipment that will increase the effectiveness of our weapons and help modernize them,” Poroshenko said, adding that non-lethal equipment will come “not only from the US.”

Earlier this year Ukraine received, from various sources, body armor, helmets, army rations, radio sets, uniforms, barbed wire and other supplies.

President Poroshenko officially confirmed the Ukrainian army’s heavy losses in its military operations in the east of the country. He added that up to 65 percent of hardware in the field had been either lost or destroyed in battle, a situation the president said was changing.

Destroyed Ukrainian military equipment in the village of Novoyekaterinovka near Komsomolsk. (RIA Novosti/Gennady Dubovoy)

Destroyed Ukrainian military equipment in the village of Novoyekaterinovka near Komsomolsk. (RIA Novosti/Gennady Dubovoy)

The troops are receiving more military hardware on a daily basis, while non-lethal equipment is arriving from abroad; Ukraine has enough lethal weapons in stock.

“We haven’t received machine-guns (from abroad) because we have them, as well as tanks, multiple rocket launchers, missiles, artillery and that helps us to hold the frontline,” Ukraine’s president said.

President Barack Obama declined to supply Ukraine with “lethal aid” despite the passionate plea for more military equipment made by Poroshenko in the US Congress. Ukraine was also not granted special security and defense status, which is the highest level of US interaction with a non-NATO ally.

Although President Poroshenko elicited applause from the US Congress, the financial help proposed by Washington is on the slender side: Ukraine will get $1 billion in ‘Financial Guarantees’ from the US and a general military aid package worth $53 million, RIA reported.

Also, the US Senate introduced a bill authorizing the Obama administration to supply $350 million worth of sophisticated weapons technology to Kiev in the fiscal year of 2015.

The Ukrainian president was bullish when he returned home, maintaining to the nation that his visit overseas had been a complete success.

Poroshenko stated he had reached a deal with President Obama whereby Washington would more actively participate in the contact between Ukraine and Russia, particularly with President Vladimir Putin. Without this contact with the Russian authorities “there wouldn’t be the ceasefire we currently have,” he said.

June 6, 2014. President Vladimir Putin (left) and Ukrainian President-Elect Petro Poroshenko (RIA Novosti/Sergey Guneev)

June 6, 2014. President Vladimir Putin (left) and Ukrainian President-Elect Petro Poroshenko (RIA Novosti/Sergey Guneev)

At the same time, Putin’s spokesperson Dmitry Peskov specifically stressed that although the Russian president did exchange opinions on measures to achieve peace in Ukraine, Putin could not negotiate any ceasefire agreement in the neighboring country.

“Russia physically cannot negotiate a ceasefire agreement because it is not a part of the conflict (in Ukraine),” Peskov said in early September.

The Ukrainian president rejected the idea that the rebellious Donetsk and Lugansk regions could get special status within the country, saying that “no territory in Ukraine would have an influence on the country’s international or domestic policies, or be able to pose a threat to country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

President Poroshenko firmly advocates a multilateral approach to settling the crisis in Ukraine and intends to engage more parties to negotiate the problem on an international level.

“This conflict should not appear to be solely a Ukrainian problem. We’re going to engage the whole world in this process,” he said.