April 25, 2014 | americanthinker.com
We are witnessing, I believe, a turning point in geopolitical history, one future historians may analyze as we have the Roman Empire's fall. Vladimir Putin is making a move -- and it's not just against Ukraine. It may not be merely a move against Eastern Europe. It's not even, perhaps, just a move against US world dominance.

There was a time when the USSR was the "evil empire," a godless Golgotha. But that was then. Now, in 2013-14, Putin has seen fit to say, in his December State of the Nation speech,

"Many Euro-Atlantic countries have moved away from their roots, including Christian values. …Policies are being pursued that place on the same level a multi-child family and a same-sex partnership, a faith in God and a belief in Satan. This is the path to degradation."

This roughly coincided with Russia's enactment of laws prohibiting homosexual propaganda and was a salvo against both the West's Great Sexual Heresy and what enables it: moral relativism.

In another shot at relativism, Putin averred,

"Society is now required…to accept without question the equality of good and evil, strange as it seems, concepts that are opposite in meaning."

The Russian president then took aim at multiculturalism: "Today, many nations are revising their moral values and ethical norms, eroding ethnic traditions and differences between peoples and cultures."

And now we're seeing the release of Russian Culture War 2.0. In a document called "Foundations of the State Cultural Policy," the Kremlin is doubling down and writes, "Russia must be viewed as a unique and original civilization that cannot be reduced to 'East' or 'West.' …A concise way of formulating this stand would be, 'Russia is not Europe.'" The document goes on to state that Russia rejects "such principles as multiculturalism and tolerance" and "projects imposing alien values on society."

... ... ...

And the West is a gift that keeps on giving insofar as this goes. Our cultural Marxists are on the march, smell blood and will not stop. They will continue spending us into oblivion, perverting us into prone position, relativizing us into risibility and "immigrationizing" us into irrelevance. Even now, not satisfied with placing another great nail in marriage's coffin, our militant secularists are making moves to legitimize pedophilia and bestiality. It's onward Luciferian soldiers.

And for Putin, it's onward Christian soldier. As our degradation advances, Russia's star can rise commensurately. Putin knows the West is in decline. He sees the demographic trends, that the US is transforming into a Third World/Hispanic nation and Western Europe into a Third World/Muslim continent. He knows that if there is another superpower in the near future, it will be Russia or China. And he knows what card he has to play to win this game.

Of course, while we could argue about whether the Christian-soldier solution is tactic and strategy or just tactic, it is so obviously prudent that it's inconceivable Putin wouldn't have pursued it. Just consider the benefits, starting with justification of Russian expansionism. If you're a typical Russian, might not the idea that "the West is decadent, debauched, exhausted and effete" justify, in your mind, a Russian manifest destiny? Might it not be natural and wholly in accordance with man's nature to believe that your moral superiority gives you the right to dominate? Note that this is the theory that justified the colonial powers' imperialism: they were bringing civilization to a world of darkness. And it's what we do to this day, applying secular values as standard. How often have we heard intervention in the Islamic "stan" du jour justified by pointing out that its rulers oppress women and are intolerant? The judgments are different, but the desire to claim the moral high ground is the same.

... ... ...

Georgiaboy61, -> 5 days ago
Time will tell if Vladimir Putin's recent statements have any basis in reality or if they are simply propaganda and disinformation, but one thing seems abundantly clear - his criticisms of the west have merit and more than a little truth. America was once great because she was good; today, she is falling from greatness because her people have turned their backs on goodness and virtue.
Alej > VonMisesJr

The Russian fertility rate is largely due to the housing shortage... people don't marry because they have no place to live, and married couples abort with abandon because there's no room for a big family.

Young married couples have for years moved in to already crowded apartments with the bride's parents... what a powder keg in which to start a marriage. Mothers-in-law are main targets for dark Russian humor...

"How many teeth should a good mother-in-law have ?"

"Two. One to open beer bottles with, and the other to ache!"

VonMisesJr > Alej

I thought Uncle Joe had built ample apartment houses in Agenda21 planned communities for all the good little commies? Perhaps the human ant colony was not accurately forecasted in the 5 year plans?

Emperor Justinian > Alej

Actually, the low fertility rate has little to do with housing. It simply mirrors the rates all over Western and Eastern Europe (comprising many countries with ample housing). In fact, birth rates are low in all white countries (at least among the whites).

For a clearer picture, watch the documentary "Demographic Winter."

ThePeeledEye

It is interesting to see both the Left and Conservatives in the American press and elsewhere describe Vladimir Putin through the same Cold War prism. For them, Putin is still the "enemy". Putin is obviously in competition with America but, as Mr. Duke has pointed out, Putin is also rejecting the decadence of the West and its submission to fanatical islamists. We have the right to criticize Putin for making deals with Iran, but note that Obama has done nothing to hinder Iran. Rather, he has emboldened Iran.

Putin said that the CIA and others were surreptitiously working in the Ukraine to foment change, in order to ally Ukraine with the West and not with Russia. Putin's claim was roundly dismissed by the American press who parroted the Obama administration and, yet, there may be validity to Putin's claim. As we have seen in N. Africa, the Obama administration worked surreptitiously and through social media (Soros?) to bring down the sovereign states in N. Africa. The result has been chaos, death, and the rise of al-Qaeda in that part of the world. From all I have read, I believe that it is more likely that

al-Qaeda groups used chemical weapons in Syria, but the American press parrots the claims of this administration that it is Assad who is continuously using these weapons.

I believe that we had a chance to work with Russia more closely against a common and declared enemy: violent Islamic fanaticism. There seemed, too, to be an opportunity to gain concessions for Israel from Assad and Putin by not taking sides with Syrian "rebels". Instead, we have a president who has chosen the side of a fanatical islamic faction and declared enemy of the West, the Muslim Brotherhood. They are now fighting alongside al-Qaeda in Syria, and Obama supports them. The Muslim Brotherhood and their vicious allies, in my view, are far more dangerous than Assad of Syria. Obama has also essentially ignored the recurrent attacks against Christians in muslim countries, even taking the side of their murderers in Syria.

America has been transformed (the hope is only temporarily) under Barack Obama, and it is clear that Putin knows what is happening here. Putin is also likely aware that America and the West have a global plan, and in many ways it emboldens islam and decadence, at the same time.

It seems that only a relatively few Democrat voters realize that America is being turned on its head. This is no longer a nation interested in providing a safety net for the less fortunate. We have a Radical Left True Believer in the White House with an enormous chip on his shoulder, and a Democrat Party helping him to achieve his "transformation". Barack Obama is against the United States, its history, its values, its wealth, its accomplishments, its strength, and most of its people. Obama, a lifelong very radical person is deliberately creating great instability in our country, such that everything our country has ever stood for is being discarded. Immorality and degenerate laws are being further pushed on this nation. Our Laws and our country's Sovereign borders are being ignored. With his attorney general, Barack Obama is, like a criminal behind the scenes, breaking every law that he can. Of course, we are a nation in decline. The Lawless are being rewarded and Lawful, Taxpaying Americans are being marginalized and called "racist", and we are quickly losing our freedoms. Veterans who fought in many wars, from WWII to Afghanistan, are being stripped of their rights and benefits by the Obama administration, and are on Watch Lists. And Vladimir Putin is witnessing all of this. He probably has a better gauge of the Criminal who sits in our White House than do most Americans.

In my view, Barack Hussein Obama is a far worse threat to America, to the West, and to world peace than is Vladimir Putin. Instead of standing up to Putin as an equal, Barack Obama has behaved like a sophomoric ideologue bent on reducing America's standing in the world. In his efforts to weaken America, Obama has proven to be a feckless and foolish ideologue who is endangering the entire world.

ThePeeledEye

It is interesting to see both the Left and Conservatives in the American press and elsewhere describe Vladimir Putin through the same Cold War prism.

For them, Putin is still the "enemy". Putin is obviously in competition with America but, as Mr. Duke has pointed out, Putin is also rejecting the decadence of the West and its submission to fanatical islamists. We have the right to criticize Putin for making deals with Iran, but note that Obama has done nothing to hinder Iran. Rather, he has emboldened Iran.

Putin said that the CIA and others were surreptitiously working in the Ukraine to foment change, in order to ally Ukraine with the West and not with Russia. Putin's claim was roundly dismissed by the American press who parroted the Obama administration and, yet, there may be validity to Putin's claim. As we have seen in N. Africa, the Obama administration worked surreptitiously and through social media (Soros?) to bring down the sovereign states in N. Africa. The result has been chaos, death, and the rise of al-Qaeda in that part of the world. From all I have read, I believe that it is more likely that al-Qaeda groups used chemical weapons in Syria, but the American press parrots the claims of this administration that it is Assad who is continuously using these weapons.

I believe that we had a chance to work with Russia more closely against a common and declared enemy: violent Islamic fanaticism. There seemed, too, to be an opportunity to gain concessions for Israel from Assad and Putin by not taking sides with Syrian "rebels". Instead, we have a president who has chosen the side of a fanatical islamic faction and declared enemy of the West, the Muslim Brotherhood. They are now fighting alongside al-Qaeda in Syria, and Obama supports them. The Muslim Brotherhood and their vicious allies, in my view, are far more dangerous than Assad of Syria. Obama has also essentially ignored the recurrent attacks against Christians in muslim countries, even taking the side of their murderers in Syria.

America has been transformed (the hope is only temporarily) under Barack Obama, and it is clear that Putin knows what is happening here. Putin is also likely aware that America and the West have a global plan, and in many ways it emboldens islam and decadence, at the same time.

It seems that only a relatively few Democrat voters realize that America is being turned on its head. This is no longer a nation interested in providing a safety net for the less fortunate. We have a Radical Left True Believer in the White House with an enormous chip on his shoulder, and a Democrat Party helping him to achieve his "transformation". Barack Obama is against the United States, its history, its values, its wealth, its accomplishments, its strength, and most of its people. Obama, a lifelong very radical person is deliberately creating great instability in our country, such that everything our country has ever stood for is being discarded. Immorality and degenerate laws are being further pushed on this nation. Our Laws and our country's Sovereign borders are being ignored. With his attorney general, Barack Obama is, like a criminal behind the scenes, breaking every law that he can. Of course, we are a nation in decline. The Lawless are being rewarded and Lawful, Taxpaying Americans are being marginalized and called "racist", and we are quickly losing our freedoms. Veterans who fought in many wars, from WWII to Afghanistan, are being stripped of their rights and benefits by the Obama administration, and are on Watch Lists. And Vladimir Putin is witnessing all of this. He probably has a better gauge of the Criminal who sits in our White House than do most Americans.

In my view, Barack Hussein Obama is a far worse threat to America, to the West, and to world peace than is Vladimir Putin. Instead of standing up to Putin as an equal, Barack Obama has behaved like a sophomoric ideologue bent on reducing America's standing in the world. In his efforts to weaken America, Obama has proven to be a feckless and foolish ideologue who is endangering the entire world.

Kirschwasser > ThePeeledEye

"They are now fighting alongside al-Qaeda in Syria, and Obama supports them. The Muslim Brotherhood and their vicious allies, in my view, are far more dangerous than Assad of Syria."

The situation is far more complex than that....

Syria sits at the intersection of three continents (Europe, Africa, Asia):

Still, Cheney said, "it is important that Assad go down" and supporting the opposition sooner might have been a more successful strategy.

Bloomberg News (June 16, 2013): "Cheney Says Obama Decision to Arm Syrian Rebels May Be Too Late "

ThePeeledEye > Kirschwasser

Kirschwasser:


I believe that the West was involved with the Free Syrian Army and other groups opposing Assad much earlier than June, 2013.

Not all of these persons were (are) trustworthy. In time, al Qaeda affiliates increased among the ranks of the "Syrian rebels". They have come from all over the muslim world. After Morsi was ousted, members of the Muslim Brotherhood were fighting in Syria alongside al Qaeda groups.

The claims by the Obama administration that chemicals were being used by Assad against Syrian civilians were vague and never fully substantiated. The MSM just repeated Obama's claims.. (I read up on this a fair bit, and I believe these weapons were used by "rebels". In one case, a reporter was present when what appeared to be small group of ignorant "rebels" fired a rocket with chemicals, and then shouted "Alahu Akbar". ) After Libya was attacked and destabilized by Obama, a massive amount of weapons, including rockets, were taken from Qaddafi's weapons cache by al Qaeda in N. Africa. Older chemical weapons were held by Qaddafi, including un-militarized uranium. (By the way, Pres GW Bush had made a deal with Qaddafi, and many of his weapons were eliminated.)

The mortality rate in Syria has been based on reports from an anti-Assad person who lives in England, according to a NYTimes report. Those numbers, too, from what I can gather, had not been substantiated.

It is generally accepted that, In 2005, Assad helped to assassinate the PM of Lebanon, Rafic Hariri, resulting in havoc there. I am not praising Assad. But I do believe that Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood with their goal of creating a Caliphate in Egypt---which is to say, across N. Africa, the Middle East and, with Erdogan's help in Turkey, is a far worse scenario than a more secular Assad remaining in Syria. For one thing, the ancient Christians in Syria would not survive under Morsi and the MB. When Morsi was overthrown in Egypt, the head of al-Qaeda, Zawahiri, called for al-Qaeda members to attempt to help get Morsi back in power in Egypt. Barack Obama is still aiding the Muslim Brotherhood, and I believe that he has withdrawn all aid from the present government in Egypt.

There are Republicans, and Democrats, who have called for the fall of Assad. McCain is one. Mr. Cheney, and probably Gov. Romney, believed that Obama should have backed more moderate Syrian rebels earlier on. That sounds to me like the good intentions we had when we backed some persons in Iraq and Afghanistan. I still believe that the MB are a very serious threat to world peace, and Obama is with them. Both Obama and Hillary Clinton support their presence in high places in our government!

ThePeeledEye > Kirschwasser

Kirschwasser:

As far as the more recent attempts to topple Assad by "Syrian rebels", I cannot help but wonder if the Obama administration actually did provide aid to some of these "rebels" early on--but clandestinely.

This is pure speculation on my part. But I do recall someone connected to the military, some time ago, stating that Obama and John Brennan were engaged in a clandestine activity in that part of the world, but he did not say where.

Georgiaboy61 > ThePeeledEye

It is more than conjecture; the whole Benghazi affair has, in essence, been a massive cover-up of the fact that the now-overrun "embassy" in Benghazi, Libya, was not an embassy at all, but a front for a CIA weapons trafficking operation designed to funnel arms to the anti-Assad/Sunni Muslim fighters in Syria (including members of al-Qaeda).

Georgiaboy61 > Kirschwasser

The book "A Mosque in Munich," by Ian Johnson, details the saga of how the CIA was instrumental in importing the Muslim Brotherhood into the west during the Cold War - as it was believed by the agency that the Ikhwan were useful anti-Communist fighters. Classic instance (yet again) of blowback on the part of Langley.

The Balkans were and are a focal point of relations between the old Judeo-Christian west, Russia and the Islamic world of the old Ottoman Empire of SW Asia and the Middle East. It is still a very sore spot with the Russians that the U.S. and NATO sided with the Muslims during the 1990s Balkans civil war, and not with mostly-Christian Serbia.

It also bears repeating that once a certain territory has been conquered by Islam and has been taken into Dar al-Islam (The House of Islam, literally), even if it changes hands again, it is thereafter considered by devout Muslims as Islamic territory. That is true not only of the Balkans, but of al-Andalus (Spain).

More than once in the pre-Soviet era - i.e., during the long reign of the Czars - the Russians fought to protect their southwestern frontier from encroachment by the Ottoman Turks.

ThePeeledEye > Georgiaboy61

Georgiaboy61:

Obama and Hillary Clinton have shown more loyalty to islamists in Benghazi than they did to Americans serving there---and we still do not have answers from these two..

Georgiaboy61 > ThePeeledEye

Agree with you completely. That we don't have answers from either of these so-called leaders speaks volumes about the real state of the rule of law in this country. The ruling class is subject to no law save that which they elect, at their discretion, to enforce upon themselves. In other words, they obey the law if they feel like, or if it polls well - but otherwise, forget it. That isn't the rule of law, but the rule of men - otherwise known as tyranny.

Kirschwasser > Georgiaboy61

"It is still a very sore spot with the Russians that the U.S. and NATO sided with the Muslims during the 1990s Balkans civil war"...

During the classic 'Great Game' period, Russia was able to exercise a disproportional amount of influence over the Balkans:

"The Dogs of War" - a Punch cartoon from June 17, 1876 showing Russia holding back the Balkan countries from attacking Turkey.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union, it opened up a rare opportunity for the British Empire to purge all Russian influence from the Balkans once and for all.

AR1476

I'm old enough to remember Dinah Shore opening her show by singing,

"See the USA in your Chevrolet
America is asking you to call
Drive your Chevrolet through the USA
America's the greatest land of all.

Even though it was a commercial, Dinah expressed in that song my feelings for America. "America's the greatest land of all." It still would be if we were allowed to return to the freedoms we enjoyed at that time. Nowadays you can't do anything without a government bureaucrat telling you how to live your life. Our politicians have given the bureaucrats the power to make our lives miserable.

They have made this a second rate nation. We need to take it back.

TsT > AR1476

or a law against it --

Stoneyjack

When Big Vlad Putin makes a stand against atheism, depravity, & US imperialist aggression, he becomes a hero to billions of people.

Mike6 > Stoneyjack

Putin is protecting his young people from the Obama pederasts, perverts, and pedophiles, and that is OK with me.

NanNJ

The verdict is still out, of course, on how Putin will been seen in history, but one thing I know for sure, Obama will be known as the president who put the final nail in the coffin of America. Everything that once was right, is now wrong, everything that was once good is now evil. I am so confused I find myself respecting the President of Russia more than the politicians here. Great article.

TsT > NanNJ

I don't trust him but , i do respect him . Oh so much more than Barry the Grifter !!

Niccolo1512

Good article. There is one problem with the theory of Russia expanding to fill the void in Europe. Its population is declining, as are all European populations. It is unlike the situation of the Roman empire being overwhelmed by the prolific goths. But perhaps Putin can change that as well.

As to whether Putin is a Christian Soldier, he is infinitely more likely to be one than Obama is.

The possibilities of Putin being a Julius Caesar are nil. Julius arose to power by replacing a republic with a dictatorship. There really is no Russian Republic to overthrow, no Rubicon to cross. It is BO who desires to overthrow a republic but lacks the character of the Roman general.

Benton H Marder > Niccolo1512

The sad aspect is that there is no Charles Martel, no Jan Sobieski, no Prince Eugene of Savoy, to turn back the Muslim Influx into Europe. Jean Raspail,in writing his novel, "Camp of the Saints' was very prophetic about the leadership of Europe. It seems that he might well have described our own leadership and its connivance and abetting of the Reconquista and our own Muslim Influx. Fifth Column in high places is our worst enemy.

Ranger+Joe > Niccolo1512

Putin is a descendant of the Rus....the Viking tribe that founded Moscow. Russia means land of the Rus. The Rus have a cultural tradition of war and conquest. They are ruthless, merciless fighters. In February, Putin flew over the Black Sea carrying the sacred icon of the Black Madonna of Kazan. Over the centuries the 'Black Virgin' has been taken to battlefields to bless Russian armies. Stalin sent it to Stalingrad in 1943. This guy means business. He's preparing to unleash Holy Hell on the West for our transgressions. He is theologically allied with the Islamofascists who share his hatred.

Mike6 > Ranger+Joe

Putin is still angry that Bill Clinton and NATO bombed Belgrade and that they killed innocent Christian Serbs. It was a violation of international law.

They bombed Serbia to protect muslim terrorists in Kosovo or Bosnia, or because fat Hillary was demanding that Bill get Monica off the front page.

Benton H Marder > Ranger+Joe

I remember seeing an old photo of the Tsar showing the ikon to his troops during the Great War. The photo shows the soldirs kneeling in prayer, their eyes fixed upon the ikon. This was somewhere at the front against Germany. Yes, Tsar Nikolai went in harms way. The Tsarina and her daughters served as nurses to the wounded during that war. They knew what war was about.

Mike6 > Benton H Marder

The Russian Royal Family knew that they were going to be murdered by the CHEKA ( not Christians) and they refused to renounce their Russian Orthodoxy. At the end, as the Bolsheviks aimed their savage mausers at them, the Czar Nicholas II Prayed.

They died to God, Russia, their people, and for Christians everywhere.

Ranger+Joe > Mike6

Mass murder is a tragic way to start a nation. It's why I hate all Commies. The princesses were stunningly beautiful girls and the prince was a sickly child. What savages...

Mike6 > Ranger+Joe

Yes, the Red were savages. Now, we have these same savages running the White House and transforming America into a second Soviet Union.

RMthoughts

Thank you for an excellent article. You said what the media will not say. The liberal establishment, both left and right, hate Putin and Russia just as the Revolutionaries of the 19th century and early 20th century hated Russia. Russia was the reactionary nation of Europe refusing to accept the French Revolution and its aftermath. Today Russia is like the prodigal son who has returned home from spiritual desolation of communism and it has once again has become the Reactionary on the block of nations, that needs to be brought down and humbled for its insolence for its willing to to call the West apostate.

Just like his Czar predecessor, who strove to show that Russia had nothing in common with the liberal ideas that came out of the French Revolution, Putin's speaks of rejection of everything of decadent post-Christian Western culture as alien to Russia and Russian life and as such Russia directly challenges our claim to moral superiority.

And now, secure at home, he has thrown a gauntlet down, challenging the West to a new clash of civilizations and turning its back on the ethos of Western liberalism that has brought us to the Abyss.

Mike6 > RMthoughts

You are correct sir. You are my friend and brother In Christ.

[Apr 22, 2014] No Sanctions Will Hurt Russia More Than People Imposing Them

Quote: "I mean, they don't want to be involved in a trade war. So, I don't see why most Asian nations would cut off Ukraine or Russia, or anybody else. This is the fight Mr. Obama has picked and, perhaps, to some extent Mr. Putin. But I don't know why China would stop trading with Ukraine, I don't see that at all.
April 22, 2014 | Jim Rogers Blog

There is no reason for Russia to worry about the western sanctions it is facing now over the Ukrainian issue since Moscow has too many other trade partners to work with, Jim Rogers, financial analyst and co-founder of the Quantum Fund, said in an interview with the VoR.

Could China's decision to purchase superjet planes be viewed as a gesture of support following a series of sanctions imposed by the West against Moscow over the Ukrainian issue?

Of course it is. I'm an American, so I hate to say this, but America is shooting itself in a foot getting the most of our world to pushing China and Russia closer together. And you are going to see more and more trade between the two. And that makes the sanctions against Russia almost impossible, because there are other people who will not play.

And are there chances for the Russia Sukhoi Superjet planes to compete with other major plane-makers?

I don't think that the Russians have enough to compete with Boeing planes yet. But you are certainly getting better. I mean, as far as cargo planes, you are probably better than anybody else. And if people are forcing you or forcing other people to buy from you, then, of course, your costs will go down, your quality will get better and it will only benefit Russia, but not benefit Europe or America.

I think that's one reason Europe and America are a little hesitant to do too much about the sanctions, because they know that they may lose more than they will gain.

And there are some articles on the Internet right now where different experts say that the sanctions imposed by the EU and the US could be bad only for them. What do you think about this sanctions strategy that the US and the EU are using with respect to Russia?

I don't see any sanctions strategy that they can use that will hurt Russia worse than it will hurt the people imposing those sanctions. You have many people who will trade with you – China, Iran, many of your neighbours. America cannot patrol all of those borders. You can get just about any products you need. Plus, some of the products that you sell, other people need them very-very badly, such as natural gas and some of the metals.

I think Mr. Obama is making the fool of himself yet again. After all, Mr. Obama is the one who instigated the coup in Ukraine where there was an elected Government. Mr. Obama, his diplomats are recorded and we have recordings of them saying – we've got to do something about this Government. And then, when it went against him, he got angry. And I'm afraid he is going to shoot himself in the foot yet again.

And if we come back to this Sukhoi Superjet deal, does it mean that Moscow is switching to the eastern market and what are the other Asian countries that Moscow could cooperate with in the nearest future, apart from China?

Of course, Russia is being forced to look east and not necessarily because they want to, but because they have to. If people are going to impose the sanctions and if you look to the east, you'd see who is out there, who may or may not trade with you. Not just North Korea, not just China, some other countries –Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam certainly will, Indonesia certainly will. So, many people that don't have problems with Russia these days, they will be happy to trade with Russia.

So, this decision to purchase these superjet planes is a gesture of support followed by the sanctions. And what about China's trade with Ukraine in this regard? Will they stop any economic relations with Ukraine?

I doubt it. I don't know why they would. I mean, they don't want to be involved in a trade war. So, I don't see why most Asian nations would cut off Ukraine or Russia, or anybody else.

This is the fight Mr. Obama has picked and, perhaps, to some extent Mr. Putin. But I don't know why China would stop trading with Ukraine, I don't see that at all.

http://www.iarex.ru/articles/47148.html

Sprechen wir von Doppelstandarten? Die Ursache wurzelt im antirussischen Rassismus: Offener Brief an Frau Bundeskanzler Angela Merkel / Roman Gasenko

18 апреля 2014 22:24

Уважаемая госпожа Меркель,

мы в России, относящие себя ко внукам Второй Мировой войны, с горечью наблюдаем, как германские СМИ и политики де факто поддерживают неонацизм на постсоветском пространстве.

Sehr geehrte Frau Merkel,

wir in Russland, die uns als Enkelkinder des 2.Weltkrieges wahrnehmen, müssen erbittert mitverfolgen, wie deutsche Medien und Politiker sich de facto dem Neonezismus im postsowjetischen Raum bekennen.

Определимся в терминологии. Вы согласны, что нацизм - это форма государственного расизма, то есть ненависти к иным, кроме коренного, народа? Вы согласны, что идеализация гитлеризма в любом виде является преступлением по нормам международного и внутреннего права? Отлично. Немцы предпочитают логику. Представьте себе - русские - тоже. Рассуждая логически - поддержка нацизма должна квалифицироваться как соучастие в тяжком преступлении, не так ли?

Wollen wir uns zunächst die Terminologie unter einen Nenner bringen. Sind Sie damit einverstanden, dass der Nazismus eine zugespitzte Form des staatlich unterstützten Rasismus ist, lediglich des Hasses zu "anderen" Völkern gegenüber der Stammnation? Sind Sie damit einverstanden, dass die Idealisierung des Hitlerismus in jeglicher Form ein vorsätzliches Verbrechen sei, laut Normen des internationalen sowie des internen Rechtes? Ausgezeichnet! Deutsche sind auf Logik angewiesen. Stellen sie sich vor, bei uns Russen ist dies auch der Fall. Logisch gesehen, muss folglich die Unterstützung des Nazismus als schweres Delikt beurteilt werden, nicht wahr?

Немцы, причем только на Западе Германии - единственный народ, который после Второй Мировой войны прошел через процедуру национального покаяния. Япония, Италия, другие страны, в том числе, и члены Евросоюза - союзники Гитлера и соагрессоры вермахта - избежали этой участи. В итоге несколько поколений немцев, даже после военных контрибуций Германии, были вынуждены в одиночку платить за общее преступление. Считаете ли Вы справедливым, что сейчас во многих этих странах открыто в качестве политического инструмента используется нацистская символика, военные преступники объявляются национальными героями, школьные учебники и детские книги героизируют гитлеризм, а немцы под Вашим руководством вынуждены с этим мириться и продолжать платить?

Das deutsche Volk, dies bezieht sich ausschliesslich auf Westdeutschland, ist das einzige, welches nach dem Ende des 2.Weltkrieges seine nationale Schuld eingesehen hat. Japan, Italien, andere Staaten, darunter EU-Mitglieder – ehemalige Alliierte Hitlerdeutschlands und Mitagressoren der Wehrmacht durften dieser Reuhe ausweichen. Als Folge mussten mehrere deutsche Generationen, neben Kriegskontributionen, diese Schuld allein auslöffeln. Halten Sie es für gerecht, dass heutzutage in vielen Ländern offenbare Nazi-Symbolik als politisches Instrument gebraucht wird, Kriegsverbrecher als Nationalhelden geachtet warden, Lehr- und Kinderbücher Hitlerismus heldenhaft darlegen, wobei Deutsche dies in Kauf nehmen und weiterhin zahlen müssen?

Выскажу не очень популярную у меня на Родине мысль. Наши народы в равной степени пострадали от нацизма. Мы принесли в жертву около тридцати миллионов жизней. Несколько моих родственников покоятся в военных могилах. И Вы вряд ли найдете в России и в странах бывшего СССР семью, которая бы в этом отношении отличалась от моей. Но и западные немцы участвовали в искоренении нацизма. После всех жертв на полях сражений, перекошенной экономики и нищеты они имеют право с гордостью заявить, что после войны уничтожили гитлеризм у себя дома. Может быть, поэтому, а еще и в силу непонятной в мире черты русского характера - дружески относиться к поверженным врагам - бывший ваффенэсесовец Гельмут Шмидт и советский генерал-лейтенант Леонид Брежнев пожали друг другу руки. Чтобы в 1975-м году, в Хельсинки, положить конец Второй Мировой войне на бумаге.

Ich darf hier eine hierzulande nicht allzu breit besprochene Idee zum Ausdruck bringen. Unsere Völker haben gleich schwer den Nazismus erlitten. Wir haben beinahe 30 Millionen Menschenleben aufgeopfert. Mehrere meine Verwandten sind in Kriegsgräbern bestattet. Und Sie würden kaum eine Familie in Russland und in ehemligen Sowjetrepublicken finden, welche sich von meiner in dieser Hinsicht unterscheidet. Doch auch Deutsche haben den Nazismus mitausgerottet. Nach all ihren Opfern auf Kriegfeldern, quergestellter Wirtschaft und Armut dürfen sie jetzt stolz sein, Hitrerismus in ihrem Zuhause ausgerottet zu haben. Vielleicht deswegen, aber auch dank einem kaum in der Welt bekannten russischen Charakterzug – geschlagene Todesfeinde als Freunde zu empfinden, haben der ehemalige Waffen-SS-Mann Helmut Schmidt und der Sowjetische Generalleutnant Leonid Breshnev einander über die Mauer Hände gereicht. Um 1975 in Helsinki den 2.Weltkrieg auf dem Papier zu beenden.

Наше поколение хорошо помнит, что оба эти архитектора европейской безопасности заложили экономический хребет Хельсинского процесса - знаменитый проект "Газ - трубы". Неужели ваши соотечественники забыли, что это планировалось как кровеносная артерия мирной и безопасной Европы, а не повод для сиюминутных антироссийских интересов, дестабилизации и противостояния вокруг фрагментов этого газопровода на разрушаемой не без Вашего участия Украине? Зачем Вы лишаете немцев права гордиться их глобальной послевоенной миротворческой ролью? Неужели свести к нулю этот повод для законной национальной гордости стоит Вашего заигрывания с Виталием Кличко - с целью сделать его лидером Украины? Хочется надеяться, что Вы руководствовались иными мотивами, нежели его явные мозговые посттравматические проблемы, ярая русофобия и приверженность гитлеризму. Возможно, Вы упустили из виду, что этот американский налогоплательщик выступил с отрицанием Великой Отечественной войны и поддержал отмену закона о запрете нацистской пропаганды. Тогда хочется понять Вашу логику. Возможно, русские и немцы не знают чего-то важного, что перевешивает эти "мелкие" недостатки.

Unsere Generation ist sich darüber im Klaren, dass die beiden Architekten der europäischen Sicherheit deutsch-sowjetisches "Gas – Röhren – Geschäft" als Wirtschaftsgrundlage des Helsinki-Prozesses ins Rollen gebracht haben. Haben ihre Mitbürger vergessen, das dies eine Schlagader für ein sicheres und friedliches Europa vorausgesetzt hatte, sondern nicht eine Vorwand, momentane antirussische Interessen auszuspielen, sowie Destabilisierung und Scherereien um die Überreste dieser Rohrleitung in der mit Ihrer Beteiligung zerlegenden Ukraine? Wieso entziehen sie den Deutschen ihr Recht, auf ihre globale Friedensrolle nach dem Krieg stolz zu sein? Ob es sich lohnt, diesen ehrvollen Erbfaktor abzunullen wegen politischer Koketterie mit Vitali Klitschko? Ob es sich lohnte ihn auf den Posten des ukrainischen Leiters durchzuboxen? Ich vermute, es seien da noch andere Motive neben seinen offesichtlichen posttraumatischen Gehirnsproblemen, markanter Russofobie und Bekenntnis dem Hitlerismus. Es ist durchaus möglich, Sie haben die Erklärung dieses amerikanischen Steuerzahlers vermisst, der Grosse Vaterländische Krieg sei kein historisches Subjekt sowie seinen Einsatz dafür, dass das Nazistopgesetz nach dem Staatsumsturz in der Ukraine rückgängig gemacht wurde. Dann bin ich gespannt, Ihre Logik mitverfolgen zu können. Mag sein, Russen und Deutsche vermissen etwas Wichtiges, was diese "Kleinigkeiten" überwiegt.

Уважаемая госпожа Меркель!

Возможно, Вы просто не полностью понимаете Западных немцев. Ведь Вы происходите из бывшей ГДР - государства, которое, подобно остальным членам Варшавского блока -Венгрии, Чехословакии, Румынии, Болгарии, бывших республик Эстонии, Литвы и Латвии -было "освобождено" от нацизма и не понесло заслуженной ответственности за соучастие в гитлеровской агрессии. Не случайно, после разрушения СССР там в основу новой государственной политики был положен вопрос о советской оккупации. Кстати, об этом. Мы прекрасно понимаем, что, несмотря на мощную экономику, Германия остается оккупированной страной. Военная бессмыслица этого статуса стала очевидна, когда без единого выстрела произошло воссоединение Германии. Тогда Рональд Рейган пообещал Горбачеву, что в ответ на роспуск Варшавского Договора он распустит НАТО. Не случилось. Вероломство, за неимением военного, имело очевидный политический смысл: продолжать расчленение постсоветского пространства, переложив при этом расходы на европейских партнеров по Североатлантическому Альянсу. Но Германия в этом процессе опять вытащила короткий жребий. Войдя в процессе разрядки в клуб ведущих мировых игроков, сейчас она, по сути унижена до статуса лишенной права самостоятельного голоса банановой колонии. Являясь донором Евросоюза, она вынуждена финансировать экономики государств, по городам которых шествуют неонацисты и соучаствовать в военных преступлениях НАТО. Вам не нравится бескровное воссоединение Крыма на основании референдума? Давайте вспомним обстрелы мирного Белграда урановыми боеприпасами, расстрел солдатами Бундесвера мирной демонстрации сербов и самопровозглашение Косова.

Sehr geehte Frau Merkel,

Ich wage anzunehmen, Sie verstehen Westdeusche nicht gut genug. Denn Sie stammen aus der damaligen DDR, einem Staat, welches, wie auch andere Warschauer Vertragsstaaten – Ungarn, Tschechoslowakei, Rumänien, Bulgarien sowie ehemalige Sowjetrepublicken Estland, Litauen und Lettland – "vom Nazismus befreit" wurde und keine Verantwortung für die Beteiligung an der Hitler-Agression mitgetragen hatte. Kein Zufall also, dass dort nach der Zerstörung der UdSSR das Thema der sowjetischen Besatzung Kernfrage der neuen Staatspolitik geprägt hatte. A propos – Besatzung. Wir sind uns darüber im Klaren, dass, trotz starker Wirtschaft, Deutschland ein besetztes Land bleibt. Die militärische Sinnlosigkeit der Tatsache ist zum Ausdruck gekommen, als schusslos die Wiedervereinigung Deuschlands erfolgt hat. Damamls hat Ronald Reagan Gorbatschow versprochen, nach Abbildung des Warschauer Vertrages NATO aufzulösen. Keine Spur. Der Wortbruch hatte ohne Verteidigungspragmatik einen puren politischen Sinn: den postsowjetischen Raum weiterhin zu zergriedern. Dabei mussten Nordatlantische Allianzpartner dafür aufkommen. Deutschland hat hier wieder den Kürzeren gezogen. Einst im Entspannungsvorgang zum Mitglied des Pools der führenden Weltspieler geworden, ist Deutschland, aus dem russischen Blickwinkel gesehen, heutzutage bis zum Status einer fergesteuerten Bananenkolonie runtergerissen. Als Blutspender der EU muss die Bundesrepublik Gehälter derjenigen Staaten subventionieren, deren Alltag marschierende Nazis prägen, sowie NATO-Militärverbrechen mittun. Ist Ihnen die blutlose wiedervereinigung Russlands und der Krim zuwider? Denken Sie an Armuran-Sprengköpfen über zivilen Wohnvierteln von Belgrad, erschossene serbische Friedensdemonstranten durch Bundeswehr-Soldaten und und referendumlose Selbsterklärung von Kossovo.

Двойные стандарты? Давайте будем честны. Причина коренится в антирусском расизме. Все оценки происходящего, которые даются членами Вашего кабинета, свидетельствуют об отношении к русским как к недочеловекам. Вот это объясняет мне, почему Вы не видите украинского неонацизма и осуждаете Путина, благодаря которому в Крыму - впервые за двадцать лет - гитлеровские наследники получили по морде. И не ошибусь, если большинство немцев именно за это Путина уважает.

Sprechen wir von Doppelstandarten? Wollen wir doch ehrlich sein. Die Ursache wurzelt im antirussischen Rassismus. Erklärungen der Mitglieder Ihres Kabinetts zum Thema "Ukraine" weisen ihr Verhalten gegenüber uns Russen als Untermenschen auf. Dies macht mir deutig, warum Sie den ukrainischen Nazismus überschauen und Putin verurteilen, dank wem erstmals in zwei Dutzend Jahren Hitler-Nachkommen auf die Fresse gekriegt haben. Und ich bin sicher, dass die Mehrheit der deutschen Bevölkerung ausgerechnet dafür ihn respektiert.

Мы понимаем, что, как руководитель оккупированной страны, вы вынуждены послушно исполнять волю метрополии. В том числе и во всех антироссийских доктринах. Но я предлагаю - нет, не Вам, а Вашим согражданам: может, чтобы оправдать все жертвы и вернуть Германии мировое уважение, используя весь богатый опыт, вместе с Россией приступить к денацификации Украины? И вспомнить, что каждый налогоплательщик однажды становится избирателем. У кого есть выбор - тот наделен ответственностью.

Wir verstehen, dass Sie als Leuter eines besetzten Landes auf die Beschlussfassung der Metropolie angewiesen sind. Auch in antirussischen Doktrinen. Doch ich schlage vor – nein, nicht Ihnen, sondern Ihren Mitbürgern: alles Aufgeopferte nicht vergeblich zu machen, all ihre Erfahrung aufzubringen und gemeinsam mit Russland Denazifizierung der Ukraine zu beginnen. Und bitte bedenken, dass jeder Steuerzahler einmal ein Wähler ist. Und wer die Wahl hat, hat die Verantwortung.

С надеждой на понимание Роман Газенко, российский документалист

Hoffnungsvoll auf Verständnis Roman Gasenko, Dokumentarfilmregisseuer/Russland

Нашли ошибку? Выделите текст, содержащий ошибку, и нажмите Ctrl+Enter.

[Apr 17, 2014] Is Putin Being Lured Into a Trap by MIKE WHITNEY

Apr 17, 2014 | CounterPunch

"Russia … is now recognized as the center of the global 'mutiny' against global dictatorship of the US and EU. Its generally peaceful .. approach is in direct contrast to brutal and destabilizing methods used by the US and EU…. The world is waking up to reality that there actually is, suddenly, some strong and determined resistance to Western imperialism. After decades of darkness, hope is emerging." – Andre Vltchek, Ukraine: Lies and Realities, CounterPunch

Russia is not responsible for the crisis in Ukraine. The US State Department engineered the fascist-backed coup that toppled Ukraine's democratically-elected president Viktor Yanukovych and replaced him with the American puppet Arseniy Yatsenyuk, a former banker. Hacked phone calls reveal the critical role that Washington played in orchestrating the putsch and selecting the coup's leaders. Moscow was not involved in any of these activities. Vladimir Putin, whatever one may think of him, has not done anything to fuel the violence and chaos that has spread across the country.

Putin's main interest in Ukraine is commercial. 66 percent of the natural gas that Russia exports to the EU transits Ukraine. The money that Russia makes from gas sales helps to strengthen the Russian economy and raise standards of living. It also helps to make Russian oligarchs richer, the same as it does in the West. The people in Europe like the arrangement because they are able to heat their homes and businesses market-based prices. In other words, it is a good deal for both parties, buyer and seller. This is how the free market is supposed to work. The reason it doesn't work that way presently is because the United States threw a spanner in the gears when it deposed Yanukovych. Now no one knows when things will return to normal.

Check out this chart at Business Insider and you'll see why Ukraine matters to Russia.

The overriding goal of US policy in Ukraine is to stop the further economic integration of Asia and Europe. That's what the fracas is really all about. The United States wants to control the flow of energy from East to West, it wants to establish a de facto tollbooth between the continents, it wants to ensure that those deals are transacted in US dollars and recycled into US Treasuries, and it wants to situate itself between the two most prosperous markets of the next century. Anyone who has even the sketchiest knowledge of US foreign policy– particularly as it relates to Washington's "pivot to Asia"– knows this is so. The US is determined to play a dominant role in Eurasia in the years ahead. Wreaking havoc in Ukraine is a central part of that plan.

Retired German Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Jochen Scholz summed up US policy in an open letter which appeared on the Neue Rheinilche Zeitung news-site last week. Scholz said the Washington's objective was "to deny Ukraine a role as a bridge between Eurasian Union and European Union….They want to bring Ukraine under the NATO control" and sabotage the prospects for "a common economic zone from Lisbon to Vladivostok."

Bingo. That's US policy in a nutshell. It has nothing to do with democracy, sovereignty, or human rights. It's about money and power. Who are the big players going to be in the world's biggest growth center, that's all that matters. Unfortunately for Obama and Co., the US has fallen behind Russia in acquiring the essential resources and pipeline infrastructure to succeed in such a competition. They've been beaten by Putin and Gazprom at every turn. While Putin has strengthened diplomatic and economic relations, expanded vital pipeline corridors and transit lines, and hurtled the many obstacles laid out for him by American-stooges in the EC; the US has dragged itself from one quagmire to the next laying entire countries to waste while achieving none of its economic objectives.

So now the US has jettisoned its business strategy altogether and moved on to Plan B, regime change. Washington couldn't beat Putin in a fair fight, so now they've taken off the gloves. Isn't that what's really going on? Isn't that why the US NGOs, and the Intel agencies, and the State Dept were deployed to launch their sloppily-engineered Nazi-coup that's left the country in chaos?

Once again, Putin played no part in any of this. All he did was honor the will of the people in Crimea who voted overwhelmingly (97%) to reunite with the Russian Federation. From a purely pragmatic point of view, what other choice did they have? After all, who in their right mind would want to align themselves with the most economically mismanaged confederation of all time (The EU) while facing the real possibility that their nation could be reduced to Iraq-type rubble and destitution in a matter of years? Who wouldn't opt-out of such an arrangement?

As we noted earlier, Putin's main objective is to make money. In contrast, the US wants to dominate the Eurasian landmass, break Russia up into smaller, non-threatening units, and control China's growth. That's the basic gameplan. Also, the US does not want any competitors, which we can see from this statement by Paul Wolfowitz which evolved into the US National Defense Strategy:

"Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power."

This is the prevailing doctrine that Washington lives by. No rivals. No competition. We're the boss. What we say, goes. The US is Numero Uno, le grande fromage. Who doesn't know this already? Here's more from Wolfowitz:

"The U.S. must show the leadership necessary to establish and protect a new order that holds the promise of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests. In non-defense areas, we must account sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order. We must maintain the mechanism for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role."

In other words, "don't even think about getting more powerful or we'll swat you like a fly." That's the message, isn't it? The reason we draw attention to these quotes is not to pick on Wolfowitz, but to show how things haven't changed under Obama, in fact, they've gotten worse. The so called Bush Doctrine is more in effect today than ever which is why we need to be reminded of its central tenets. The US military is the de facto enforcer of neoliberal capitalism or what Wolfowitz calls "the established political and economic order". Right. The statement provides a blanket justification for the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and now Ukraine. The US can do whatever it deems necessary to protect the interests of its constituents, the multi-national corporations and big finance. The US owns the world and everyone else is just a visitor. So shut the hell up, and do what you're told. That's the message. Here's Wolfowitz one more time:

"We continue to recognize that collectively the conventional forces of the states formerly comprising the Soviet Union retain the most military potential in all of Eurasia; and we do not dismiss the risks to stability in Europe from a nationalist backlash in Russia or efforts to reincorporate into Russia the newly independent republics of Ukraine, Belarus, and possibly others."

Wolfowitz figured the moment would come when the US would have to square off with Moscow in order to pursue it's imperial strategy in Asia. Putin doesn't seem to grasp that yet. He still clings to the misguided notion that rational people will find rational solutions to end the crisis. But he's mistaken. Washington does not want a peaceful solution. Washington wants a confrontation. Washington wants to draw Moscow into a long-term conflict in Ukraine that will recreate Afghanistan in the 1990s. That's the goal, to lure Putin into a military quagmire that will discredit him in the eyes of the world, isolate Russia from its allies, put strains on new alliances, undermine the Russian economy, pit Russian troops against US-backed armed mercenaries and Special Ops, destroy Russian relations with business partners in the EU, and create a justification for NATO intervention followed by the deployment of nuclear weapons on Ukrainian territory. That's the gameplan. Why doesn't Putin see that?

[Apr 05, 2014] Vladimir Putin, Christian Crusader By Patrick J. Buchanan •

April 4, 2014 | The American Conservative

In his Kremlin defense of Russia's annexation of Crimea, Vladimir Putin, even before he began listing the battles where Russian blood had been shed on Crimean soil, spoke of an older deeper bond.

Crimea, said Putin, "is the location of ancient Khersones, where Prince Vladimir was baptized. His spiritual feat of adopting Orthodoxy predetermined the overall basis of the culture, civilization and human values that unite the peoples of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus."

Russia is a Christian country, Putin was saying. This speech recalls last December's address where the former KGB chief spoke of Russia as standing against a decadent West:

Many Euro-Atlantic countries have moved away from their roots, including Christian values. Policies are being pursued that place on the same level a multi-child family and a same-sex partnership, a faith in God and a belief in Satan. This is the path to degradation.

Heard any Western leader, say, Barack Obama, talk like that lately?

Indicting the "Bolsheviks" who gave away Crimea to Ukraine, Putin declared, "May God judge them." What is going on here? With Marxism-Leninism a dead faith, Putin is saying the new ideological struggle is between a debauched West led by the United States and a traditionalist world Russia would be proud to lead. In the new war of beliefs, Putin is saying, it is Russia that is on God's side. The West is Gomorrah.

Western leaders who compare Putin's annexation of Crimea to Hitler's Anschluss with Austria, who dismiss him as a "KGB thug," who call him "the alleged thief, liar and murderer who rules Russia," as Wall Street Journal's Holman Jenkins did, believe Putin's claim to stand on higher moral ground is beyond blasphemous.

But Vladimir Putin knows exactly what he is doing, and his new claim has a venerable lineage. The ex-Communist Whittaker Chambers who exposed Alger Hiss as a Soviet spy, was, at the time of his death in 1964, writing a book on "The Third Rome." The first Rome was the Holy City and seat of Christianity that fell to Odoacer and his barbarians in 476 A.D. The second Rome was Constantinople, Byzantium, (today's Istanbul), which fell to the Turks in 1453. The successor city to Byzantium, the Third Rome, the last Rome to the old believers, was-Moscow.

Putin is entering a claim that Moscow is the Godly City of today and command post of the counter-reformation against the new paganism. Putin is plugging into some of the modern world's most powerful currents. Not only in his defiance of what much of the world sees as America's arrogant drive for global hegemony. Not only in his tribal defense of lost Russians left behind when the USSR disintegrated. He is also tapping into the worldwide revulsion of and resistance to the sewage of a hedonistic secular and social revolution coming out of the West.

In the culture war for the future of mankind, Putin is planting Russia's flag firmly on the side of traditional Christianity. His recent speeches carry echoes of John Paul II whose Evangelium Vitae in 1995 excoriated the West for its embrace of a "culture of death."

What did Pope John Paul mean by moral crimes? The West's capitulation to a sexual revolution of easy divorce, rampant promiscuity, pornography, homosexuality, feminism, abortion, same-sex marriage, euthanasia, assisted suicide-the displacement of Christian values by Hollywood values.

Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum writes that she was stunned when in Tbilisi to hear a Georgian lawyer declare of the former pro-Western regime of Mikhail Saakashvili, "They were LGBT."

"It was an eye-opening moment," wrote Applebaum. Fear and loathing of the same-sex-marriage pandemic has gone global. In Paris, a million-man Moral Majority marched in angry protest. Author Masha Gessen, who has written a book on Putin, says of his last two years, "Russia is remaking itself as the leader of the anti-Western world."

But the war to be waged with the West is not with rockets. It is a cultural, social, moral war where Russia's role, in Putin's words, is to "prevent movement backward and downward, into chaotic darkness and a return to a primitive state."

Would that be the "chaotic darkness" and "primitive state" of mankind, before the Light came into the world? This writer was startled to read in the Jan-Feb. newsletter from the social conservative World Council of Families in Rockford, Ill., that, of the "ten best trends" in the world in 2013, number one was "Russia Emerges as Pro-Family Leader." In 2013, the Kremlin imposed a ban on homosexual propaganda, a ban on abortion advertising, a ban on abortions after 12 weeks and a ban on sacrilegious insults to religious believers.

"While the other super-powers march to a pagan world-view," writes WCF's Allan Carlson,

"Russia is defending Judeo-Christian values. During the Soviet era, Western communists flocked to Moscow. This year, World Congress of Families VII will be held in Moscow, Sept. 10-12."

Will Vladimir Putin give the keynote? In the new ideological Cold War, whose side is God on now?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of -> Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025? Copyright 2014 Creators.com.

[Apr 04, 2014] Putin's Rejection of the West, in Writing by Leonid Bershidsky

bloombergview.com

What kind of country is Vladimir Putin's Russia? The third year of his third presidential term has offered plenty of clues: the Crimea invasion, the shuttering of uncensored media outlets, prison terms for protesters. Now, Putin is planning to put the intellectual and ideological foundations of the new regime into words.

A document called "Foundations of the State Cultural Policy" has been under development since 2012. A special working group under Putin's chief of staff Sergei Ivanov will soon roll it out for a month of "public debate" before Putin gets to sign it. Quotes from the culture ministry's draft, presumably the basis for the final one, have leaked out.

"Russia must be viewed as a unique and original civilization that cannot be reduced to 'East' or 'West,'" reads the document, signed by Deputy Culture Minister Vladimir Aristarkhov. "A concise way of formulating this stand would be, 'Russia is not Europe,' and that is confirmed by the entire history of the country and the people."

Russia's non-European path should be marked by "the rejection of such principles as multiculturalism and tolerance," according to the draft. "No references to 'creative freedom' and 'national originality' can justify behavior considered unacceptable from the point of view of Russia's traditional value system." That, the document stresses, is not an infringement on basic freedoms but merely the withdrawal of government support from "projects imposing alien values on society."

The draft goes on to explain that certain forms of modern art and liberal Western values in general are unacceptable and harmful to society's moral health.

Although Putin has mentioned Russia's "civilizational differences" with the West in his speeches, Russia has never asserted, in so many words, that its ideology is based on the rejection of the European path and of universal values such as democratic development and tolerance toward different cultures. If "Foundations of the State Cultural Policy" is adopted in the form proposed by the culture ministry, isolationism and, yes, intolerance of anything "alien" will be enshrined on an official level.

I read an interesting explanation of the anti-Western backlash in a column by pro-Kremlin political commentator Dmitri Yuriev. For a quarter of a century, he wrote, Russia sought rapprochement with the West and strove to be a member of the club. "A policy of entering the world community, joining the 'normal world' was approved by default," Yuriev recalled. "That 'normal world' was friendly, peaceful, democratic. It awaited Russia with gratitude for getting rid of the threat of Communist expansion and a world war." In fact, however, Russia "came up against increasingly vicious, cynical and uncompromising contempt for the interests of Russia."

Yuriev's description of Russia's seduction and rejection by the West, which it sought to befriend after the Soviet Union fell apart, lies at the core of what Putin, and his culture ministry, bill as a return to traditional values. In the view of official ideologues, the West held up the bright wrappers of its hypocritical values to coax Russia into submission, and it very nearly succeeded. Having gained nothing on that path, Russia must cleanse itself of the remnants of its romance with liberalism and tolerance.

[Mar 31, 2014] Aid to Ukraine Is a Bad Deal for All by Rep. Ron Paul

I would argue that real patriotism is defending this country and making sure that our freedoms are not undermined here. Unfortunately, while so many are focused on freedoms in Crimea and Ukraine, the US Congress is set to pass an NSA "reform" bill that will force private companies to retain our personal data and make it even easier for the NSA to spy on the rest of us. We need to refocus our priorities toward promoting liberty in the United States!
March 31, 2014 | Antiwar.com

Last week Congress overwhelmingly passed a bill approving a billion dollars in aid to Ukraine and more sanctions on Russia. The bill will likely receive the president's signature within days. If you think this is the last time US citizens will have their money sent to Ukraine, you should think again. This is only the beginning.

This $1 billion for Ukraine is a rip-off for the America taxpayer, but it is also a bad deal for Ukrainians. Not a single needy Ukrainian will see a penny of this money, as it will be used to bail out international banks who hold Ukrainian government debt. According to the terms of the International Monetary Fund (IMF)-designed plan for Ukraine, life is about to get much more difficult for average Ukrainians. The government will freeze some wage increases, significantly raise taxes, and increase energy prices by a considerable margin.

But the bankers will get paid and the IMF will get control over the Ukrainian economy.

The bill also authorizes more US taxpayer money for government-funded "democracy promotion" NGOs, and more money to broadcast US government propaganda into Ukraine via Radio Free Europe and Voice of America. It also includes some saber-rattling, directing the US Secretary of State to "provide enhanced security cooperation with Central and Eastern European NATO member states."

The US has been "promoting democracy" in Ukraine for more than ten years now, but it doesn't seem to have done much good. Recently a democratically-elected government was overthrown by violent protesters. That is the opposite of democracy, where governments are changed by free and fair elections. What is shocking is that the US government and its NGOs were on the side of the protesters! If we really cared about democracy we would not have taken either side, as it is none of our business.

Washington does not want to talk about its own actions that led to the coup, instead focusing on attacking the Russian reaction to US-instigated unrest next door to them. So the new bill passed by Congress will expand sanctions against Russia for its role in backing a referendum in Crimea, where most of the population voted to join Russia. The US, which has participated in the forced change of borders in Serbia and elsewhere, suddenly declares that international borders cannot be challenged in Ukraine.

Those of us who are less than gung-ho about sanctions, manipulating elections, and sending our troops overseas are criticized as somehow being unpatriotic. It happened before when so many of us were opposed to the Iraq war, the US attack on Libya, and elsewhere. And it is happening again to those of us not eager to get in another cold – or hot – war with Russia over a small peninsula that means absolutely nothing to the US or its security.

I would argue that real patriotism is defending this country and making sure that our freedoms are not undermined here. Unfortunately, while so many are focused on freedoms in Crimea and Ukraine, the US Congress is set to pass an NSA "reform" bill that will force private companies to retain our personal data and make it even easier for the NSA to spy on the rest of us. We need to refocus our priorities toward promoting liberty in the United States!

[Mar 31, 2014] America Is Shooting Itself In The Foot Over Russia by Jim Rogers

Zero Hedge
There is no reason for Russia to worry about the western sanctions it is facing now over the Ukrainian issue since "Moscow has too many other trade partners to work with," Jim Rogers explains in this interview, adding that "America is shooting itself in a foot getting the most of our world to pushing China and Russia closer together." Simply put, he warns, "I don't see any sanctions strategy that they can use that will hurt Russia worse than it will hurt the people imposing those sanctions."

Via Voice Of Russia,

Could China's decision to purchase superjet planes be viewed as a gesture of support following a series of sanctions imposed by the West against Moscow over the Ukrainian issue?

Of course it is. I'm an American, so I hate to say this, but America is shooting itself in a foot getting the most of our world to pushing China and Russia closer together. And you are going to see more and more trade between the two. And that makes the sanctions against Russia almost impossible, because there are other people who will not play.

And are there chances for the Russia Sukhoi Superjet planes to compete with other major plane-makers?

I don't think that the Russians have enough to compete with Boeing planes yet. But you are certainly getting better. I mean, as far as cargo planes, you are probably better than anybody else. And if people are forcing you or forcing other people to buy from you, then, of course, your costs will go down, your quality will get better and it will only benefit Russia, but not benefit Europe or America.

I think that's one reason Europe and America are a little hesitant to do too much about the sanctions, because they know that they may lose more than they will gain.

And there are some articles on the Internet right now where different experts say that the sanctions imposed by the EU and the US could be bad only for them. What do you think about this sanctions strategy that the US and the EU are using with respect to Russia?

I don't see any sanctions strategy that they can use that will hurt Russia worse than it will hurt the people imposing those sanctions. You have many people who will trade with you – China, Iran, many of your neighbors. America cannot patrol all of those borders. You can get just about any products you need. Plus, some of the products that you sell, other people need them very-very badly, such as natural gas and some of the metals.

I think Mr. Obama is making the fool of himself yet again. After all, Mr. Obama is the one who instigated the coup in Ukraine where there was an elected Government. Mr. Obama, his diplomats are recorded and we have recordings of them saying – we've got to do something about this Government. And then, when it went against him, he got angry. And I'm afraid he is going to shoot himself in the foot yet again.

And if we come back to this Sukhoi Superjet deal, does it mean that Moscow is switching to the eastern market and what are the other Asian countries that Moscow could cooperate with in the nearest future, apart from China?

Of course, Russia is being forced to look east and not necessarily because they want to, but because they have to. If people are going to impose the sanctions and if you look to the east, you'd see who is out there, who may or may not trade with you. Not just North Korea, not just China, some other countries –Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam certainly will, Indonesia certainly will. So, many people that don't have problems with Russia these days, they will be happy to trade with Russia.

So, this decision to purchase these superjet planes is a gesture of support followed by the sanctions. And what about China's trade with Ukraine in this regard? Will they stop any economic relations with Ukraine?

I doubt it. I don't know why they would. I mean, they don't want to be involved in a trade war. So, I don't see why most Asian nations would cut off Ukraine or Russia, or anybody else. This is the fight Mr. Obama has picked and, perhaps, to some extent Mr. Putin. But I don't know why China would stop trading with Ukraine, I don't see that at all.

n. But I don't know why China would stop trading with Ukraine, I don't see that at all.

[Mar 31, 2014] Pushing Toward The Final War by Paul Craig Roberts

Zero Hedge

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts via his blog,

Does Obama realize that he is leading the US and its puppet states to war with Russia and China, or is Obama being manipulated into this disaster by his neoconservative speech writers and government officials? World War 1 (and World War 2) was the result of the ambitions and mistakes of a very small number of people. Only one head of state was actually involved–the President of France.

In The genesis Of The World War, Harry Elmer Barnes shows that World War 1 was the product of 4 or 5 people. Three stand out: Raymond Poincare`, President of France, Sergei Sazonov, Russian Foreign Minister, and Alexander Izvolski, Russian Ambassador to France. Poincare` wanted Alsace-Lorraine from Germany, and the Russians wanted Istanbul and the Bosphorus Strait, which connects the Black Sea to the Mediterranean. They realized that their ambitions required a general European war and worked to produce the desired war.

A Franco-Russian Alliance was formed. This alliance became the vehicle for orchestrating the war. The British government, thanks to the incompetence, stupidity, or whatever of its Foreign Minister, Sir Edward Grey, was pulled into the Franco-Russian Alliance. The war was started by Russia's mobilization. The German Kaiser, Wilhelm II, was blamed for the war despite the fact that he did everything possible to avoid it.

Barnes' book was published in 1926. His reward for confronting the corrupt court historians with the truth was to be accused of being paid by Germany to write his history. Eighty-six years later historian Christopher Clark in his book, The Sleepwalkers, comes to essentially the same conclusion as Barnes.

In the history I was taught the war was blamed on Germany for challenging British naval supremacy by building too many battleships. The court historians who gave us this tale helped to set up World War 2.

We are again on the road to World War. One hundred years ago the creation of a world war by a few had to be done under the cover of deception. Germany had to be caught off guard. The British had to be manipulated and, of course, people in all the countries involved had to be propagandized and brainwashed.

Today the drive to war is blatantly obvious. The lies are obvious, and the entire West is participating, both media and governments.

The American puppet, Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper, openly lied on Canadian TV that Russian President Putin had invaded Crimea, threatened Ukraine, and was restarting the Cold War. The host of the TV program sat and nodded his head in agreement with these bald-faced lies. http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Stephen+Harper+accuses+Vladimir+Putin+being+stuck+back+USSR/9663692/story.html

The script that Washington handed to its Canadian puppet has been handed to all of Washington's puppets, and everywhere in the West the message is the same. "Putin invaded and annexed Crimea, Putin is determined to rebuild the Soviet Empire, Putin must be stopped."

I hear from many Canadians who are outraged that their elected government represents Washington and not Canadians, but as bad as Harper is, Obama and Fox "News" are worse.

On March 26 I managed to catch a bit of Fox "news." Murdoch's propaganda organ was reporting that Putin was restoring the Soviet era practice of exercise. Fox "news" made this report into a threatening and dangerous gesture toward the West. Fox produced an "expert," whose name I caught as Eric Steckelbeck or something like that. The "expert" declared that Putin was creating "the Hitler youth," with a view toward rebuilding the Soviet empire.

The extraordinary transparent lie that Russia sent an army into Ukraine and annexed Crimea is now accepted as fact everywhere in the West, even among critics of US policy toward Russia.

Obama, whose government overthrew the democratically elected government in Ukraine and appointed a stooge government that has threatened the Russian provinces of Ukraine, falsely accuses Putin of "invading and annexing" Crimea.

Obama, or his handlers and programers, are relying on the total historical ignorance of Western peoples. The ignorance and gullibility of Western peoples allows the American neoconservatives to fashion "news" that controls their minds.

Obama recently declared that Washington's destruction of Iraq–up to one million killed, four million displaced, infrastructure in ruins, sectarian violence exploding, a country in total ruins–is nowhere near as bad as Russia's acceptance of Crimean self-determination. US Secretary of State John Kerry actually ordered Putin to prevent the referendum and stop Crimeans from exercising self-determination.

Obama's speech on March 26 at the Palace of Fine Arts in Brussels is surreal. It is beyond hypocrisy. Obama says that Western ideals are challenged by self-determination in Crimea. Russia, Obama says, must be punished by the West for permitting Crimeans to exercise self-determination. The return of a Russian province on its own volition to its mother country where it existed for 200 years is presented by Obama as a dictatorial, anti-democratic act of tyranny. http://on.rt.com/sbzj4o

Here was Obama, whose government has just overthrown the elected, democratic government of Ukraine and substituted stooges chosen by Washington in the place of the elected government, speaking of the hallowed ideal that "people in nations can make their own decisions about their future." That is exactly what Crimea did, and that is exactly what the US coup in Kiev contravened. In the twisted mind of Obama, self-determination consists of governments imposed by Washington.

Here was Obama, who has shredded the US Constitution, speaking of "individual rights and rule of law." Where is this rule of law? It is certainly not in Kiev where an elected government was overthrown with force. It is certainly not in the United States where the executive branch has spent the entirety of the new 21st century establishing government above the law. Habeas corpus, due process, the right to open trials and determination of guilt by independent jurors prior to imprisonment and execution, the right to privacy have all been overturned by the Bush/Obama regimes. Torture is against US and international law; yet Washington set up torture prisons all over the globe.

How is it possible that the representative of the war criminal US government can stand before an European audience and speak of "rule of law," "individual rights," "human dignity," "self-determination," "freedom," without the audience breaking out in laughter?

Washington is the government that invaded and destroyed Afghanistan and Iraq on the basis of lies. Washington is the government that financed and organized the overthrow of the Libyan and Honduran governments and that is currently attempting to do the same thing to Syria and Venezuela. Washington is the government that attacks with drones and bombs populations in the sovereign countries of Pakistan and Yemen. Washington is the government that has troops all over Africa. Washington is the government that has surrounded Russia, China, and Iran with military bases. It is this warmongering collection of Washington war criminals that now asserts that it is standing up for international ideals against Russia.

No one applauded Obama's nonsensical speech. But for Europe to accept such blatant lies from a liar without protest empowers the momentum toward war that Washington is pushing.

Obama demands more NATO troops to be stationed in Eastern Europe to "contain Russia." http://news.antiwar.com/2014/03/26/obama-wants-more-nato-troops-in-eastern-europe/ Obama said that a buildup of military forces on Russia's borders would reassure Poland and the Baltic states that, as NATO members, they will be protected from Russian aggression. This nonsense is voiced by Obama despite the fact that no one expects Russia to invade Poland or the Baltic countries.

Obama doesn't say what effect the US/NATO military buildup and numerous war games on Russia's border will have on Russia. Will the Russian government conclude that Russia is about to be attacked and strike first? The reckless carelessness of Obama is the way wars start.

Declaring that "freedom isn't free," Obama is putting pressure on Western Europe to pony up more money for a military buildup to confront Russia. http://news.antiwar.com/2014/03/26/us-presses-eu-nations-to-hike-military-spending-to-confront-russia/

The position of the government in Washington and its puppet states (Eastern and Western Europe, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Georgia, Japan) and other allies purchased with bagfuls of money is that Washington's violation of international law by torturing people, by invading sovereign countries on totally false pretenses, by routinely overthrowing democratically elected governments that do not toe the Washington line is nothing but the "indispensable and exceptional country" bringing "freedom and democracy to the world." But Russia's acceptance of the self-determination of Crimean people to return to their home country is "a violation of international law."

Just what international law has Washington and its puppets not violated?

Obama, whose government in the past few years has bullied Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Lebanon, Iran, Honduras, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Venezuela and is now trying to bully Russia, actually declared that "bigger nations can not simply bully smaller ones." What does Obama and his speech writers think Washington has been doing for the entirety of the 21st century?

Who can possibly believe that Obama, whose government is responsible for the deaths of people every day in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, and Syria, cares a whit about democracy in Ukraine. Obama overthrew the Ukrainian government in order to be able to stuff the country into NATO, throw Russia out of its Black Sea naval base, and put US missile bases in Ukraine on Russia's border. Obama is angry that his plan didn't pan out as intended, and he is taking his anger and frustration out on Russia.

As the delusion takes hold in Washington that the US represents idealism standing firmly against Russian aggression, delusion enabled by the presstitute media, the UN General Assembly vote, and Washington's string of puppet states, self-righteousness rises in Washington's breast.

With rising self-righteousness will come more demands for punishing Russia, more demonization of Russia and Putin, more lies echoed by the presstitutes and puppets. Ukrainian violence against Russian residents is likely to intensify with the anti-Russian propaganda. Putin could be forced to send in Russian troops to defend Russians.

Why are people so blind that they do not see Obama driving the world to its final war?

Just as Obama dresses up his aggression toward Russia as idealism resisting selfish territorial ambitions, the English, French, and Americans presented their World War 1 "victory" as the triumph of idealism over German and Austrian imperialism and territorial ambitions. But at the Versailles Conference the Bolsheviks (the Tsar's government failed to gain the Straits and instead lost the country to Lenin) "revealed the existence of the notorious Secret Treaties embodying as sordid a program of territorial pilfering as can be found in the history of diplomacy. It appears that the chief actual motives of the Entente in the World War were the seizure of Constantinople and the Straits for Russia; not only the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France, but the securing of the west bank of the Rhine, which would have involved the seizure of territory historically far longer connected with Germany than Alsace-Lorraine had ever been with France; the rewarding of Italian entry into the War by extensive territory grabbed away from Austria and the Jugo-Slavs; and the sequestering of the German imperial possessions, the acquisition of the German merchant marine and the destruction of the German navy in the interest of increasing the strength of the British Empire" (Barnes, pp. 691-692). The American share of the loot was seized German and Austrian investments in the US.

The secret British, Russian, and French aims of the war were hidden from the public, which was whipped up with fabricated propaganda to support a war whose outcomes were far different from the intentions of those who caused the war. People seem unable to learn from history. We are now witnessing the world again being led down the garden path by lies and propaganda, this time in behalf of American world hegemony.

[Mar 31, 2014] They Never Learn - Russia's Take On The West And The Shifting Geopolitical Balance Of Power

03/30/2014 | Zero Hedge
Over the past month, there has been a lot of "Hilsenrathing", or the biased media urgently "explaining" to the Western world, just what Russia's actions mean both tactically in response to Ukraine developments, and strategically as part of Putin's global perspective. So instead of relying on the broken media narrative which serves merely to perpetuate US corporate interests and rally the public behind this or that company's geopolitical interests, here, straight from the horse's mouth, in this case Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, how Russia sees itself in a world in which it is allegedly "isolated", and "threatening Ukraine" with further invasion but more importantly, how the Russians view the rapidly changing global balance of power, in which post-USSR Russia has emerged from the backwood of slighted nations and stormed to the stage of nations who dare defy the former global hegemon, the US.

Some notable highlights by Lavrov from the interview conducted with Rossiya 24:

The punchline:

And the next steps in terms of what Russia sees an ongoing response to NATO incursion:

[Mar 25, 2014] New US Strategy for Encircling Russia by George Friedman

Mar 25, 2014 | Keghart.com

The below is an abridged version of an article by George Friedman of the Stratfor geopolitical weekly. The author, a Cold Warrior, advises the U.S. on how to continue its policy of encircling Russia, in light of the Crimean crisis. -Editor.

As a result of the events in Ukraine, the United States is now engaged in a confrontation with Russia. A failure to engage would cause countries around Russia's periphery, from Estonia to Azerbaijan, to conclude that with the U.S. withdrawn and Europe fragmented, they must reach an accommodation with Russia.

If the U.S. chooses to confront Russia with a military component, it must be on a stable perimeter and on as broad a front as possible to extend Russian resources and decrease the probability of Russian attack at any one point out of fear of retaliation elsewhere. The ideal mechanism for such a strategy would be NATO, which contains almost all of the critical countries save Azerbaijan and Georgia.

Since the rest of Europe is not in jeopardy, and European countries are not prepared to commit financial and military efforts to a problem they believe can be managed with little risk to them. Therefore, any American strategy must bypass NATO or at the very least create new structures to organize the region.

Estonia, Poland, Romania, and Azerbaijan share the common danger that events in Ukraine could affect their national security interests, including internal stability. Because of this, and also because of their intrinsic importance, they must be the posts around which America should build a new military alliance.

At the far end of the alliance structure envisioned is Azerbaijan, bordering Russia and Iran. Should Dagestan and Chechnya destabilize, Azerbaijan -- with majority Shiite but secular -- would become critical for limiting the regional spread of jihadists. Azerbaijan also would support the alliance's position in the Black Sea by supporting Georgia and would serve as a bridge for relations (and energy) should Western relations with Iran continue to improve. To the southwest, the very pro-Russian Armenia--which has a Russian troop presence and a long-term treaty with Moscow--could escalate tensions with Azerbaijan in Nagorno-Karabakh. Previously, this was not a pressing issue for the U.S. Now it is.

The security of Georgia and its ports on the Black Sea requires Azerbaijan's inclusion in the alliance. Azerbaijan serves a more strategic purpose. Most of the countries in the alliance are heavy importers of Russian energy. There is no short-term solution to this problem, but Russia needs the revenue from these exports as much as these countries need the energy. Developing European shale and importing U.S. energy is a long-term solution. A medium-term solution, depending on pipeline developments that Russia has tended to block in the past, is sending natural gas from Azerbaijan to Europe. Until now, this has been a commercial issue, but it has become a strategically critical issue. The Caspian region, of which Azerbaijan is the lynchpin, is the only major alternative to Russia for energy. Therefore, rapid expansion of pipelines to the heart of Europe is as essential as providing Azerbaijan with the military capability to defend itself (a capability it is prepared to pay for and, unlike other allied countries, does not need to be underwritten).

The key to the pipeline will be Turkey's willingness to permit transit. I have not included Turkey as a member of this alliance. Its internal politics, complex relations and heavy energy dependence on Russia make such participation difficult.

This is not an offensive force but a force designed to deter Russian expansion. All of these countries need modern military equipment, particularly air defense, anti-tank and mobile infantry. The U.S. should supply these weapons, for cash or credit. An alliance with Azerbaijan would be criticized, but if energy doesn't come from Azerbaijan it will come from Russia.

Russian power is limited and has flourished while the U.S. was distracted by its wars in the Middle East and while Europe struggled with its economic crisis. That does not mean Russia is not dangerous. It has short-term advantages, and its insecurity means that it will take risks. The United States has an interest in acting early because early action is cheaper than acting in the last extremity. This is a case of anti-air missiles, attack helicopters, communications systems and training, among other things. It is not a case of deploying divisions, of which it has few. The Poles, Romanians, Azerbaijanis and certainly the Turks can defend themselves. They need weapons and training, and that will keep Russia contained within its cauldron as it plays out a last hand as a great power.

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/estonia-azerbaijan-american-strategy-after-ukraine?utm_source=freelist-f&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20140325&utm_term=Gweekly&utm_content=readmore

[Mar 12, 2014] The Rocky punch in US foreign policy By Issa Ardakani

Asia Times Online

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing.

"This is not Rocky IV," said US Secretary of State John Kerry with respect to the Russian response to the ongoing putsch in Ukraine. Some may find it strange that an American secretary of state would invoke the name of an anti-Russian Hollywood movie to implore a Russian leader to heed his warnings. But in fact, Kerry's statement is not unusual at all; rather, it represents the wider lack of self-awareness which is the driving force behind American foreign policy culture. This lack of self-awareness manifests itself perfectly in Rocky IV. The movie was not only a masterpiece of political propaganda, but it has unintentionally served as a window into the absurdities of American exceptionalism and the concept's role in US foreign affairs.

The artificial villain

The first issue of note in Rocky IV is the artificial, contrived nature of the driving conflict. This conflict is strictly born out of the emergence of our villain - Russian Olympic champion Ivan Drago, who is introduced to us through a Sports Illustrated cover. The cover reads: "Russians invade US sports." As we all know, this is in reference to Drago's foray into professional boxing.

In the Hollywood universe, this is sufficient reason to make one a villain (so long as he's Russian, anyhow). However, objectively speaking, how can anyone consider such an act to be an "invasion?" Drago going pro is only an act of aggression within the context of American exceptionalism and its inherent paranoia. Compare this to actual current events: American officials and media personalities are crying imperialism over the potential "annexation" of Crimea by Russia, despite the fact that Crimea's government requested Russian military presence, and the option to join the Russian Federation will be put up to vote in Crimea. A democratic imperialism, indeed.

Glorification of a non-glorious struggle

Apollo Creed, boxer Rocky Balboa's former rival and current friend, plays a big role in propping up the non-conflict: "I don't want this chump to come over here with all that hype, you know … trying to make us look bad. They've tried every other way. With Rocky's help, we can get great media coverage. We can make them look bad for a change." And minutes later: "You and me, we don't even have a choice. … We have to be right in the middle of the action because we're the warriors. And without some challenge - without some damn war to fight, then the warrior may as well be dead, Stallion."

Apollo equates Drago entering professional boxing to a Soviet violation of American sovereignty, and likens the boxing ring to a field of battle. To any sensible viewer, this type of disproportionate response and over-politicization of a non-issue should be taken as an indication of Apollo's delusion and paranoia. But that is not how this speech is framed in the movie. The filmmakers clearly want us to take this as the rousing speech of a brave warrior, much like how Mr Kerry and the like expect us to take their stances on Russia as having any semblance of moral value.

Right and wrong sides of the tracks

So, what is it about Drago that makes him a villain? Why should we, the audience, be pulling for Apollo or Rocky? In the press conference before the Drago and Creed's Las Vegas exhibition bout, Apollo makes an ass of himself, taking repeated verbal jabs at Drago's expense while Drago remains completely silent. Apollo's patriotic offensive continues into fight night, when he participates in a ringside concert along with James Brown, performing "Living in America." Until this point in the movie, there is really nothing that would objectively suggest Apollo being the character we should sympathize with. So why is it a foregone conclusion that Drago is the baddie? Simply put: because Apollo is American. Drago is Russian. That's all that matters. Apollo has the right to make an ass of himself; Drago's mere existence in professional boxing is an act of aggression against him and his country.

This extends to other characters in the movie, as well. Take note of how Ludmila (Drago's wife) is depicted for doing more or less the same things as Rocky's wife Adrian. When Adrian supports Rocky in his training, it is portrayed as an act of love by a devoted wife. But Ludmila's support of her husband - including her concern for threats against his life - is essentially used as a point in favor of her being evil.

Another case of this double standard can be seen as the commentators discuss the Moscow crowd's booing of Rocky. "Listen to this crowd! - We knew he wouldn't be popular, but this borders on pure hatred." Note: there was no reference to "pure hatred" when Drago faced similar levels of booing in his Las Vegas. Such double standards only make moral sense within the context of American exceptionalism. But these very double standards are often the backbone of American stances. We can see this in American dealings with Iran, for example - where the United States government has afforded itself the right to embargo the country and threaten it with military action, for enriching uranium within the limitations of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

During the press conference announcing the Drago-Rocky bout, it is revealed that the Russian side has two demands: they want the fight to take place in Russia, on Christmas day. The latter is to be interpreted as a depiction of the atheistic communists' disregard for the most important holiday for Christians. But there are two very important flaws with this: firstly, Christmas for Orthodox Christians (Russians being among them) is on January 7, by which time most American families have already disposed of their tree. So why should such a date have even been objectionable for Americans? Secondly, it makes no sense for a country where "The NBA on Christmas day" has become a tradition, to express opposition toward the idea of a sporting event being held on Christmas.

As for the location of the fight, the moment Rocky tells the press that the fight will be in Russia, there is an uproar. But why? Why is the idea of the fight being held in Russia so objectionable? Wanting to hold the fight in Russia is not political at all, unless you find it offensive that any sporting event be held outside of your own country.

Politicization of sport

These Russian demands, among other things, are used by the filmmakers to depict how the Russians are politicizing the sport. When Ludmila says "We are not politic," we are meant to take it as a bald-faced lie. But there truly is nothing political about their demands. The uproar is based upon a foundation of hypocrisy and self-styled exceptionalism.

Furthermore, how can the movie condemn the supposed politicization of sports, when Rocky IV's narrative is itself a politicization of sports (and not in such a subtle way, either)? The politicization of sports is nothing new to the United States, and Russia has been a prime target of this politicization. The Winter Olympics in Sochi were politicized to a very high degree amongst American athletes and media personalities alike, with Bob Costas' anti-Putin political monologue, Pussy Riot appearing at the Amnesty concert in New York to coincide with the Sochi games, and numerous American athletes before the games protesting Russia's supposed oppression of homosexuals.

Self-redemption through submission

In the lead-up to the fight, Rocky trains in almost total isolation. In fact, his plane to Russia lands in what seems like a remote village. (But then again, perhaps this was the filmmakers' understanding of what Moscow looked like). Rocky did not interact with very many Russians until fight night, where he was booed violently. At the start of the fight, the Russian people are one with Drago. Their emotions and animosity are surrogates; they act on behalf of the stoic Drago, whose character does not allow for such expressions of emotions. The Russian people are the villain.

However, the transformation of the crowd from enemy to friend is the single most important dynamic of the movie. What happened during the course of the fight that, following its end, led Rocky to become the object of adoration of the people of Moscow? What happened was, Rocky won. The first cheer for Rocky was heard after Rocky started not getting completely throttled by Drago. And this momentum would build until, toward the end of the fight, it seemed that almost everyone (including the General-Secretary of the CPSU) was on Rocky's side. Rocky achieved all of this simply by punching the Russian people's national hero into submission.

The Russian people redeem themselves and reclaim their humanity only by disowning Drago and embracing Rocky. In other words, had the Russians not began to cheer on the man in red, white and blue trunks as he beat their greatest sportsman, they would have languished in their moral inferiority. Submission to America's will is the requisite for moral acceptability. Thus, immoral world actors like Israel, Saudi Arabia and the like, can become moral simply through their allegiance to the American imperial project.

It is clear that the makers of this film had a Kanye West-level of self-awareness with respect to their country. But considering the recent statements by Kerry, and other American behavior on the world stage, this is not very surprising. Rocky IV may be recognized by most Americans viewers as being ridiculously absurd, but these same viewers should not neglect to notice that the movie tells us more about the sad reality of American foreign policy than first glance would seem to reveal.

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing. Articles submitted for this section allow our readers to express their opinions and do not necessarily meet the same editorial standards of Asia Times Online's regular contributors.

Issa Ardakani is a Detroit-based historian and political analyst who writes mostly about Iranian issues. He has a twitter account (@TheHalalButcher).

(Copyright 2013 Issa Ardakani)

About Abby Martin, Liz Wahl and media wars

RT Op-Edge

Today RT America anchor Liz Wahl resigned on air, claiming she disagrees with the channel's editorial stance. And here's what I have to say about it.

These days it takes a lot of courage to work for RT. Never before have I seen RT and its journalists bullied like this. See for yourselves what they did to poor Abby. First, she openly voiced disagreement with Russia's stance on air – and was virtually made an American hero. But then Abby reminded everyone how much she disagrees with America's stance as well, adding she takes pride in working at RT, where she is free to express her views. Less than an hour passed before Abby had her name dragged through something I have difficulty finding a decent name for this late at night. The US mainstream media even went as far as claiming we had orchestrated the whole thing as a publicity move. They labeled Abby a conspiracy theorist, bringing to light her past as an activist. In less than 24 hours, they first sang her praises and then excoriated her. All of this in front of her colleagues, including Liz Wahl. How do you think they felt watching that?

Yesterday I spent quite some time explaining to a New York Times correspondent why I consider Russia's position to be right. I'm Russian. I support my country and I will fight for the truth for as long as it takes. Neither Abby, nor Liz, nor many other employees are Russian nationals, but foreign. And now their country is likening my country to Nazi Germany. For many years they have worked for RT in good faith, proving every day that a voice that stands out from the mainstream media can be beautiful and strong, attract an audience that grows daily. These are the people who were the first to tell their country about the Occupy movement, who were detained at protest rallies, handcuffed for hours and then tried in court for doing their job. These are the people who were outraged by US hypocrisy in Syria, Libya – you can finish the list yourself – and reminded the world who used chemical weapons most often, even resorting to nuclear bombs. These are the people who did things the Western mainstream media would have never done. But those were peaceful times. And now we've got a genuine war going on – no, thank God, it's not in Crimea. It's a media war. Every single day, every single hour the guys who work for us are told, "You are liars, you are no journalists, you are the Kremlin propaganda mouthpiece, you've sold yourselves to the Russians, it's time you quit your job, and everybody is laughing at you, so change your mind before it's too late."

The storm of articles posted about RT over the last couple of days – literally tons of printed copy - looks as if it were written to dictation. Hardly any respectable media outlet refrained from lambasting and lynching RT journalists in articles or reports. Our employees listen to their colleagues, their fellow citizens, and their potential employers, as career prospects are obviously important to every journalist. How many could withstand this pressure? Well, some will and some won't. Some sincerely disagree, as they believe their own country more than mine. Others are simply thinking about their future. And it's hard for me to judge them.

This is all typical of a media war. We're not the first and we will not be the last to go through this. During the Arab Spring, Al Jazeera staff in Lebanon made headlines by resigning en masse. Their Egyptian colleagues followed suit. Over twenty journalists resigned citing disagreement with the channel's editorial line. That this happened without any pressure from the world mass media was due to the fact that, throughout the Arab Spring, Al Jazeera was completely in tune with the global mainstream. So no one sought to criticize the channel, on the contrary, everyone praised its coverage.

A couple of minutes after Liz made her statement, we found all the major news media in the world - as our exhausted spokeswoman put it, "CNN, NYT, pretty much everyone" – glowing with schadenfreude, as they lined up for official feedback from RT. This included those who had ignored the news of the Ashton-Paet phone leak revelation, as if it didn't happen. A rival media anchor's resignation is certainly much more newsworthy and more relevant to the Ukraine crisis than two European leaders saying opposition henchmen may have been killing people.

[Mar 04, 2014] Putin: Deploying military force is last resort, but we reserve right

March 04, 2014 | RT

Russia will not go to war with the people of Ukraine, but will use its troops to protect citizens, if radicals with clout in Kiev now try to use violence against Ukrainian civilians, particularly ethnic Russians, Putin told the

Putin, who was given a mandate by the Russian senate to use military force to protect civilians in Ukraine, said there is no need for such an action yet.

Putin cited the actions of radical activists in Ukraine, including the chaining of a governor to a stage as public humiliation and the killing of a technician during an opposition siege of the Party of Regions HQ, as justification for Russia to be concerned for the lives and well-being of people in eastern and southern Ukraine.

Incidents like those are why Russia reserves the option of troop deployment on the table.

"If we see this lawlessness starting in eastern regions, if the people ask us for help – in addition to a plea from a legitimate president, which we already have – then we reserve the right to use all the means we possess to protect those citizens. And we consider it quite legitimate," he said.

Russia is not planning to go to war with the Ukrainian people, Putin stressed, when a journalist asked if he was afraid of war. But Russian troops would prevent any attempts to target Ukrainian civilians, should they be deployed.

"We are not going to a war against the Ukrainian people," he said. "I want you to understand it unambiguously. If we do take a decision, it would only be to protect Ukrainian citizens. Let anybody in the military dare, and they'd be shooting their own people, who would stand up in front of us. Shoot at women and children. I'd like to see anyone try and order such a thing in Ukraine."

Putin dismissed the notion that the uniformed armed people without insignia who are currently present in Crimea are Russian soldiers. He said they are members of the Crimean self-defense forces and that they are no better equipped and trained than some radical fighters who took part in the ousting of Yanukovich.

He assured that the surprise military drills in Russia's west which ended on Tuesday had nothing to do with the Ukrainian situation.

Sanction threats are counterproductive

Asked about criticism of Russia over its stance on Ukraine, Putin dismissed the accusations that Russia is acting illegitimately. He stated that even if Russia does use force in Ukraine, it would not violate international law.

At the same time he accused the United States and its allies of having no regard to legitimacy when they use military force in pursuit of their own national interests.

"When I ask them 'Do you believe you do everything legitimately,' they say 'Yes.' And I have to remind them about the US actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, where they acted either without any UN Security Council mandate or through perverting a mandate, as was the case in Libya," Putin said.

"Our partners, especially in the United States, always clearly formulate for themselves their geopolitical and national interests, pursue them relentlessly and then drag the rest of the world in, using the principle 'You are either with us or against us.' And harass those who refuse to be dragged in," he added.

As for the sanctions Russia faces over Ukraine, Putin said those threatening them should think of the consequences to themselves if they follow that path. In an interconnected world a country may hurt another country if it wishes, but it would be damaged too.

Threats are counterproductive in this situation, Putin warned. He added that if G8 members choose not to go to Sochi for a planned G8 summit, that would be up to them.

Putin sympathies with Maidan protesters, rejects coup

Putin stressed that the Ukrainian people had a legitimate reason to protest against Yanukovich's power, considering the overwhelming corruption and other faults of his presidency.

But he objected to the illegitimate way his ouster took place, because it undermined the political stability in the country.

"I strictly object to this form [of transition of power] in Ukraine, and anywhere in the post-Soviet space. This does not help nurturing a culture of law. If someone is allowed to act this way, then everyone is allowed to. And this means chaos. That's the worst thing that can happen to a country with an unstable economy and an unestablished political system," Putin explained.

He said that while he personally was not fond of months-long streets protests as a means to pressure the government, he sympathized with the Maidan demonstration members, who were genuinely outraged with the situation in Ukraine.

But at the same time he warned that what happens in Ukraine now may be a replacement of one group of crooks with another, citing the appointments of certain wealthy businessmen with questionable reputations.

Asked about the presence of snipers during the violent confrontation in Kiev last month, Putin said he was not aware of any order from the Yanukovich government to use firearms against the protesters. He alleged that the shooters could have been provocateurs from one of the opposition forces. He added that what he was sure of is the fact that police officers were shot at with lethal arms during the confrontation.

Yanukovich is certainly powerless in Ukraine, but legally speaking he is the legitimate president of the country, Putin said. The way the new authorities in Kiev replaced him did not enhance their credibility.

Asked if he felt for Yanukovich, Putin said "Oh, no. I have absolutely different feelings." But he declined to publicly explain what those were. He also refrained from commenting on what mistakes he saw in Yanukovich's actions, explaining that it would not be proper for him to do so.

At the same time Putin does not see any political future for Yanukovich, which he told the ousted Ukrainian president himself. He added that Russia allowed him to come to its territory for humanitarian reasons, because if he remained in Ukraine he could have been summarily executed.

Equal participation in Ukraine's future for all Ukrainians

The Russian government is currently engaging with the self-proclaimed govern of Ukraine with the goal of preserving economic ties between the two countries. However, any normal relations would only be possible after Ukraine has fully legitimate branches of government, Putin said. He considers that he has no counterpart in Kiev now, so he personally has no partner to communicate with.

The Russian president stressed that Russia wants to see equal participation of all citizens of Ukraine in defining the future of the country. The resistance to the authorities in Kiev, which is evident currently in the eastern and southern Ukraine, shows clearly that currently Kiev does not have a nationwide mandate to govern the country.

"Frankly, they should adopt a new constitution through a referendum so that all citizens of Ukraine feel engagement in that process, have an input on the formation of the new principles of how their nation should function," Putin suggested. "That's certainly not for us, but for the Ukrainians and the Ukrainian authorities to decide this way or another. I believe after legitimate government is formed, after a new president elected, after a new parliament is elected, they should return to this."

Russia will be watching the planned presidential election in Ukraine, Putin said. If it is conducted in an atmosphere of terror, Russia will consider it unfair and will not recognize its results, he warned.

Putin commented on the issue of Ukraine's territorial integrity, which Russia committed to preserve. He said that Western powers reject Russia's assessment of the events in Ukraine as a coup and insist on calling it a revolution.

Some Russian experts, Putin warned that if Ukraine had undergone a revolution, then the nation that came out of it is not the same that it was before, similarly to how Russia transformed after the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917.

If this is the case, Moscow may consider itself no longer bound by any treaties it has with Ukraine, Putin warned.

[Mar 04, 2014] Famous Putin characterization of the USA -- looks like they have some lab over the pond and make cruel experiments on people here, without understanding of consequences

Full interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD3BDUtSJs4

Putin : "Let them only try."

[Mar 03, 2014] Sustaining Ukraine's Breakthrough

Today, Ukraine needs a modern-day equivalent of the Marshall Plan, by which the United States helped to reconstruct Europe after World War II. Germany ought to play the same role today as the US did then.

By George Soros

Following a crescendo of terrifying violence, the Ukrainian uprising has had a surprisingly positive outcome. Contrary to all rational expectations, a group of citizens armed with not much more than sticks and shields made of cardboard boxes and metal garbage-can lids overwhelmed a police force firing live ammunition. There were many casualties, but the citizens prevailed. This was one of those historic moments that leave a lasting imprint on a society's collective memory.

How could such a thing happen? Werner Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics offers a fitting metaphor. According to Heisenberg, subatomic phenomena can manifest themselves as particles or waves; similarly, human beings may alternate between behaving as individual particles or as components of a larger wave. In other words, the unpredictability of historical events like those in Ukraine has to do with an element of uncertainty in human identity.

People's identity is made up of individual elements and elements of larger units to which they belong, and peoples' impact on reality depends on which elements dominate their behavior. When civilians launched a suicidal attack on an armed force in Kyiv on February 20, their sense of representing "the nation" far outweighed their concern with their individual mortality. The result was to swing a deeply divided society from the verge of civil war to an unprecedented sense of unity.

Whether that unity endures will depend on how Europe responds. Ukrainians have demonstrated their allegiance to a European Union that is itself hopelessly divided, with the euro crisis pitting creditor and debtor countries against one another. That is why the EU was hopelessly outmaneuvered by Russia in the negotiations with Ukraine over an Association Agreement.

True to form, the EU under German leadership offered far too little and demanded far too much from Ukraine. Now, after the Ukrainian people's commitment to closer ties with Europe fueled a successful popular insurrection, the EU, along with the International Monetary Fund, is putting together a multibillion-dollar rescue package to save the country from financial collapse. But that will not be sufficient to sustain the national unity that Ukraine will need in the coming years.

I established the Renaissance Foundation in Ukraine in 1990 – before the country achieved independence. The foundation did not participate in the recent uprising, but it did serve as a defender of those targeted by official repression. The foundation is now ready to support Ukrainians' strongly felt desire to establish resilient democratic institutions (above all, an independent and professional judiciary). But Ukraine will need outside assistance that only the EU can provide: management expertise and access to markets.

In the remarkable transformation of Central Europe's economies in the 1990's, management expertise and market access resulted from massive investments by German and other EU-based companies, which integrated local producers into their global value chains. Ukraine, with its high-quality human capital and diversified economy, is a potentially attractive investment destination. But realizing this potential requires improving the business climate across the economy as a whole and within individual sectors – particularly by addressing the endemic corruption and weak rule of law that are deterring foreign and domestic investors alike.

In addition to encouraging foreign direct investment, the EU could provide support to train local companies' managers and help them develop their business strategies, with service providers remunerated by equity stakes or profit-sharing. An effective way to roll out such support to a large number of companies would be to combine it with credit lines provided by commercial banks. To encourage participation, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) could invest in companies alongside foreign and local investors, as it did in Central Europe.

Ukraine would thus open its domestic market to goods manufactured or assembled by European companies' wholly- or partly-owned subsidiaries, while the EU would increase market access for Ukrainian companies and help them integrate into global markets.

I hope and trust that Europe under German leadership will rise to the occasion. I have been arguing for several years that Germany should accept the responsibilities and liabilities of its dominant position in Europe. Today, Ukraine needs a modern-day equivalent of the Marshall Plan, by which the United States helped to reconstruct Europe after World War II. Germany ought to play the same role today as the US did then.

I must, however, end with a word of caution. The Marshall Plan did not include the Soviet bloc, thereby reinforcing the Cold War division of Europe. A replay of the Cold War would cause immense damage to both Russia and Europe, and most of all to Ukraine, which is situated between them. Ukraine depends on Russian gas, and it needs access to European markets for its products; it must have good relations with both sides.

Here, too, Germany should take the lead. Chancellor Angela Merkel must reach out to President Vladimir Putin to ensure that Russia is a partner, not an opponent, in the Ukrainian renaissance.

Где ты был во время Майдана?

Два народа в одном киевском офисе.

Сотрудница киевского офиса – о том, как изменились отношения в коллективе после Майдана, чем отличаются западные украинцы от восточных, и где заложена бомба взаимного непонимания.

Я работаю в компании, один офис которой находится в Крыму, второй - в Киеве. Часть времени провожу в одном, часть в другом. Я - билингва и этническая украинка. То есть аллергии на Украину, украинский язык и прочее, у меня нет. Но Майдан выпустил наружу всех "тараканов", которые роились в головах жителей запада и востока Украины. И их оказалось столько, что порой трудно работать.

Открываю письмо от партнера, который всегда общался со мной на русском, будучи уверенным, что мовы я, крымчанка, не знаю. "Тепер я буду з вами розмовляти тільки українською!". Отвечаю на украинском же: " Немає проблем, я розмовляю українською". И узнаю, что он, оказывается, "западенец", просто давно живет в Киеве и выучил русский. А теперь вспомнил о корнях и решил оттоптаться на тех, кто не так сильно напрягался в свое время, как он думает. Вспомнилось: "Хто не скаче - той москаль".

В нашем киевском, главном офисе, руководитель - русскоязычный киевлянин, однако его ближайшее окружение - из Западной Украины. Причем набор на вновь открывшиеся вакансии шел таким образом, что, если претендовал "западенец", то брали его. Коллеги-киевляне бурчали на предмет того, зачем ему "западенцы", если своим работы не хватает. Обычная проблема большого города, не правда ли? Бурчали из разряда "начальство хорошим не бывает, нужно же найти недостатки", но мирно пили чай и даже дружили.

Однако со временем стали видеть, что мы - разные. В чем это выражается? Ну, например. Если к "восточному" украинцу подойти и попросить что-то сделать, первыми его вопросами будут: "А это срочно?". У западного украинца: "А почему я должен это делать?".

Если для нас остаться и что-то доделать - нормально, да и по работе нам позвонить в выходной можно, то дергать наших западенцев - табу. Они отдыхают. Это невежливо.

Они старались говорить на русском, хотя чаще мы переходили на украинский, но в целом жили мирно.

Сейчас нас разделяет пропасть.

Офис разделился на тех, кто был на Майдане (в основном - Западная Украина), и тех, кто не был. Еще во время мирного Майдана первые косились на вторых и презирали. Всей душой. Было время, когда не здоровались. Мы пыхтели и молча, с пониманием тянули работу за двоих-троих, за тех, кто ходил на Майдан. Мы понимали, что, раз так сложилась ситуация, важно не завалить работу - после Майдана тоже нужно будет кушать. Некоторые сидели ночами, так как работы накопилось много, и ее нужно было разгребать и систематизировать. Ведь конец года никто не отменял, так же, как и сдачу документов, планирование, бюджетирование.

Западенцы уговаривали начальство не принимать никаких финансовых решений и планов. Говорили: "Зачем? Майдан же, а после Майдана непонятно что будет. Может, нас вообще закроют".

Мы стискивали зубы и добивали отчеты, вели текущую работу, планировали координацию на следующий год.

Была часть сотрудников, которая, как и мы, сидела в офисе, но, вместо работы, с упоением обсуждала все события на Майдане. Эти считались майдановскими и рукопожатыми.

На дни рождения стали пить за Степана Бендеру и Тягныбока. Мы морщились, но, чтобы не быть нелояльными и неполиткорректными, молча пили за свое.

Теперь мы должны ходить с мрачным видом, потому что наша будничная жизнь и мелкие радости оскорбляют чувства тех, кто на Майдане был. Да, нам искренне жаль тех, кто погиб. Но нужно двигаться дальше и продолжать жить.

Соцсети и наши высказывания в них относительно Майдана и всего, что с этим связано, наши западноукраинские коллеги мониторят и оценивают похлеще спецслужб. К некоторым - тем, кто не ходил на Майдан и против того, что происходит в стране - высказываться запретили. Понятно, что официального приказа по организации нет, но вызвали и строго предупредили, что терпеть подобное не будут.

Что же такого говорят "немайдановские" коллеги? А примерно следующее: "Не была я на Майдане и не пошла бы туда второй раз. Угробить сто человек, чтобы перенести выборы на 6-7 месяцев - ради этого не стоило воевать. И я не понимаю, почему должна ненавидеть за их гибель Россию".

Россия - это еще один большой "таракан". Всю дорогу СМИ трубили, что в Борисполе высадился русский десант, что на Украине действует российский спецназ. Русский след до сих пор ищут. То нашли российские военные знаки отличия в какой-то гостинице. То кто-то сказал, что их били люди с московским акцентом. Доказательств ноль, но осадок оставался и накапливался. Теперь, так или иначе, это отражается на положении русскоязычных и на позициях русского языка.

Россияне, которые помогали Майдану, сейчас удивляются, за что их здесь не любят и называют в соцсетях "рабами", русский язык – "оккупационным", тех, кто не говорит в обиходе на украинском – "олигофренами". Логика простая: если ты не говоришь, значит, не можешь. А раз не можешь – дебил и олигофрен. А если я могу, но просто хочу говорить на родном русском? Да, это пока не мейнстрим, это, скорее, крайности, но таких ситуаций становится больше.

"Где ты был во время Майдана?". Они планируют спросить об этом каждого. Нас втянули в войну, которой мы не хотели. Мы три месяца жили на пороховой бочке. Мы не пошли на Майдан, потому не считали это нашей войной. И мы виноваты теперь в том, что они вышли, а мы нет. Но мы их об этой войне не просили.

Мы переходим к толерантности по-европейски. Когда те, кто считал себя ущемленным, садится на голову и свешивает ноги. Неужели те киевляне, крымчане, одесситы, днепродзержинцы, которые поддерживали Майдан, хотели этого?

И еще. Сейчас, когда в Крыму начались нешуточные волнения, среди сторонников Майдана проходят красивые акции "против спекуляций нечистоплотных политиков на языковой теме". Сначала львовское издательство, отроду не печатавшее книг на русском, решило изменить себе и одну все же напечатать. Потом киевский телеведущий, с детских лет принципиально не говоривший по-русски, заговорил. Затем Львов всем городом объявил день общения на русском. Все эти одноразовые акции конечно не могут не радовать, но доверия, уж простите не вызывают. В свете вышесказанного.

Светлана Коцуба
26.02.2014

[Feb 24, 2014] Leave Ukraine Alone! by Rep. Ron Paul

February 24, 2014 Antiwar.com

Last week Ukraine saw its worst violence since the breakup of the Soviet Union over 20 years ago. Protesters occupying the main square in the capitol city, Kiev, clashed with police leaving many protesters and police dead and many more wounded. It is an ongoing tragedy and it looks like there is no end in sight.

The current conflict stems from a divide between western Ukraine, which seeks a closer association with the European Union; and the eastern part of the country, which has closer historic ties to Russia.

The usual interventionists in the US have long meddled in the internal affairs of Ukraine. In 2004 it was US government money that helped finance the Orange Revolution, as US-funded NGOs favoring one political group over the other were able to change the regime. These same people have not given up on Ukraine. They keep pushing their own agenda for Ukraine behind the scenes, even as they ridicule anyone who claims US involvement.

A recent leaked telephone conversation between two senior government officials made it clear that not only was the US involved in the Ukrainian unrest, the US was actually seeking to determine who should make up the next Ukrainian government!

Senator John McCain, who has made several trips to Ukraine recently to meet with the opposition, wrote last week that the US must stand up to support the territorial integrity of Ukraine, including Crimea.

Why are US government officials so eager to tell the Ukrainians what they should do? Has anyone bothered to ask the Ukrainians? What if might help alleviate the ongoing violence and bloodshed if the Ukrainians decide to remake the country as a looser confederation of regions rather than one tightly controlled by a central government? Perhaps Ukraine engaged in peaceful trade with countries both to the west and east would benefit all sides. But outside powers seem to be fighting a proxy war, with Ukraine suffering the most because of it.

If you asked most Americans how they feel, my bet is that you would discover they are sick and tired of the US government getting involved in every crisis that arises. Certainly the American people want none of of this intervention in Ukraine. They understand, as recent polls have shown, that our interventionist foreign policy is only creating more enemies overseas. And they also understand that we are out of money. We could not afford to be the policemen of world even if we wanted to be.

And I bet if we asked the Ukrainians, a vast majority of them would prefer that the US – and Russia and the European Union – stay out their affairs and respect their sovereignty. Is it so difficult to understand why people resent being lectured and bribed by foreign governments? All we need to do is put ourselves in the place of the Ukrainians and ask ourselves how we would feel if we were in the middle of a tug-of-war between a very strong Canada on one side and a very strong Mexico on the other. We would resent it as well. So let's keep our hands off of Ukraine and let them solve their own problems!

[Feb 24, 2014] Ukraine another piece in US-NATO-EU neo-con puzzle by John Robles

Good overview of Russian grievances...
Feb 21, 2014 | The Voice of Russia

A monstrous crime is being committed in Ukraine right before the eyes of the world and the western media is helping to cover it up and distract the attention of the entire world from the core fact that the events in Ukraine are not a popular uprising but a carefully orchestrated synthetic coup d'état brought about by long entrenched western color revolution infrastructure that was installed by US/NATO/EU to bring about the illegal act of regime change on the sovereign country of Ukraine.

The unprecedented violent actions by the armed insurgents, who openly use deadly force on law enforcement and have set Kiev in flames, attempting to overthrow the government by force, are in fact treasonous crimes against the Ukraine and the people of Ukraine as they are being controlled from the outside and violate all internationally accepted democratic principles as well as all of the internal laws and constitutionally dictated standards of conduct enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine.

It is illegal under international law for any country to carry out measures to bring about the illegal change of the government in any other sovereign state, this includes support of any kind for insurgent forces, the implementation of economic and other measures to pressure the government to step down or dissolve and all other instruments and measures both covert and overt that may be used to bring about what is now popularly called "regime change" by the West and the US Government.

International Law

Overthrowing governments and removing presidents by force is illegal and covered in laws and ruling by bodies such as the World Court and even the International Criminal Court, which has become a mere instrument of the West, however the United Nations Charter is the most important document and widely respected of all of these instruments and one which all countries that attempt to abide by international law attempt to follow.

Under the UN Charter all attempts by the US/NATO/EU to influence the events in Ukraine so as to bring about a resolution that conforms to their own interests are illegal.

The debate over US/NATO/EU meddling in Ukraine and the use of US/NATO/EU military force, economic measures, political pressure and all of the other "tools" they use, including aggressive military attack and occupation, to effect regime changes in countries such as Afghanistan, Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Serbia, Venezuela, Ukraine, Yugoslavia, Sudan and the other targeted countries, has conveniently been absent of one key fact: coercive, forced and outside regime change violates basic all of the accepted tenets of international law.

UN Charter

According to Article 1 (2) of the UN Charter developing peaceful international relations based on the "principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples" is one of the founding principles of the United Nations, and by default the UN Security Council. Therefore any attempt by any country to subjugate or pressure another into implementing measures or carrying out an agenda not instigated from within and not in keeping with the will of the people is illegal. The "will of the people" can only be known through referendums and democratic political processes and debates, not through fabricated pogroms in the streets, which the US is expert at organizing. As for pressure on the government, even the implementation of sanctions is therefore illegal as this is done to pressure a government from the outside.

It is prohibited under international law to threaten to use force and Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter states this clearly and requires all UN member states to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of other states. US/NATO/EU have not threatened military force against Ukraine, as they already have their ground force installed as they did in Syria, Libya, etc. but this applies to other countries they have invaded recently.

Article 2 (7) of the UN Charter states clearly that the United Nations and its members have no authority to intervene in matters which are within the domestic jurisdiction of any state (sovereign country). However the US/NATO/EU have gotten around this by implementing and using what they call the Responsibility to Protect. Uprisings and violent demonstrations such as what is happening in Ukraine fall within the definition of domestic jurisdiction, therefore any outside attempt to interfere is illegal.

Armed Insurgents

What is alarming in Ukraine is the violent and militarized nature of what the West is endlessly painting as a legitimate opposition. This portrayal runs contrary to what the most of the world is seeing right in front of their eyes on their TV screens. Even multiple statements by US officials themselves and a recently released telephone conversation between US official Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine, show that these are not members of a legitimate internal opposition, but rather radicalized, militarized, trained, planted, funded and supported members of western "color revolution" infrastructure.

The US/NATO/EU continue to egregiously blame the government and are criminally silent when the opposition they support, and in fact planted, murder members of the security forces and policemen. The outright murder, kidnapping and extreme violence against police and security forces should be something that would cause an outcry among police officers worldwide, especially in the US, where their police are given almost god-like reverence, yet the so called "international community" and members of the world's law enforcement bodies are silent.

Nothing that the insurgents have done would be supported in any US/NATO/EU country or city, yet they continue to call on, threaten and pressure the authorities in Ukraine to not interfere or take required measures. The violent insurgents have made a mockery of law and order and have literally set the capital of a civilized, democratic European country on fire.

Storming, seizing and burning down the buildings which house the instruments and bodies of the state; openly shooting, murdering, kidnapping and falsely detaining members of law enforcement; destroying and setting alight the property of the state and the people; organizing the pogrom we are seeing in Ukraine; violating the law and acting against their own constitution; blackmailing and threatening officials to step down or be complaint and finally promoting policies that are not in keeping with the desires of the Ukrainian people, are all factual aspects of the Ukrainian "opposition". So why is US/NATO/EU openly supporting them?

Business As Usual for US/NATO/EU

In my journalistic work I have attempted to robustly detail for years what US/NATO have been doing in their redesigning of world's geopolitical landscape and I cannot repeat this enough, what we are seeing in Ukraine is just another regime change for the West. The tactics they use are always the same, we have seen them and documented them time and again and they continue to be illegal and egregious. Yet they continue with impunity.

All of the regime change actions and provocations that US/NATO/EU have used in Ukraine have been documented and exposed before the fact, yet the US president, EU leaders and their compliant media continue to egregiously stick to their own artificial pre-planned narrative.

The goal was regime change because US/NATO/EU understood that the Ukrainian Government and more importantly the Ukrainian people would not allow their country to be subverted and become yet another US/NATO/EU client state. More importantly this turn to Russia seriously interferes with US/NATO/EU military plans to base US/NATO missiles in Ukraine, evict the Russian Black Sea Fleet and achieve their prime military objective of neutralizing Russia and eliminating Russia's response to a first strike nuclear attack, which at the end of the day is the goal. The people of Ukraine and the organs of government are just inconveniences for US/NATO/EU and even if the country is completely destroyed and divided, their goal will be carried out. The destruction of the state of Ukraine will in fact benefit the US/NATO/EU and this fact we have seen repeatedly in the last 15 years.

Obama Connects Syria and Ukraine

In comments related to a soon to be released Voice of Russia interview Professor Francis Boyle a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law told me the following: "Obama said that the people of the Ukraine should be able to determine their own future just like the people of Syria should be able to determine their own future. So Obama himself linked the two. The strategy is the same: regime change, civil war, destruction of the State. So this elevates the call by the State Department for a transition to a government of technocrats to the presidential level. The cat is out of the bag. Regime Change of the democratically elected government of Ukraine is openly admitted to be USG policy. Even worse than Syria, whose government was arguably not really democratic. Nevertheless as I point out in my book, the demand for regime change by one government against another government is illegal and violates the World Court's ruling against the United States in the Nicaragua decision (1996)."

Media Failure

The western mass media continues to promote and spread a phony slanted narrative of the events in Ukraine and their attempts have been formidable and almost impossible to counter. This concerns mostly the nature and portrayal of the police murdering opposition which, like the cop killers in the Caucuses, the West portrays as heroes and some sort of freedom fighters.

Again the hypocrisy of the West in Ukraine is resounding and completely obvious, yet they continue with impunity. US illegality and their complete and total disregard for international law continue to stare the world in the face in Guantanamo and worldwide, yet the compliant media has failed as US illegality has now spread like a cancer to include all NATO/EU countries.

It is another black day for the world as we see that the mass media has completely failed and been corrupted in the West. All of the facts surrounding the murderous insurgents in Ukraine and their bloody uprising and the collusion of the Central Intelligence Agency, US/NATO/EU and the West are being conveniently ignored as the subservient media chooses to attempt to go so far as to blame Russia which has from day one made it a point not to interfere.

Nowhere do we see debates going on regarding: the over $50 billion the US has spent buying out Ukraine; the admission by Victoria Nuland of US meddling in her telephone conversation, during which she implicated the head of the UN in US/NATO/EU plans; the training and equipping of the insurgents by US/NATO/EU; the fact that all outside pressure and meddling is illegal nor the fact that if anything similar happened in the West it would in no way be allowed.

Wake Up Call

They have won and Ukraine has fallen. The President of Ukraine has stated he will step down, which was the first call by the US/NATO/EU, when the first encampments appeared on Maidan Square. This was their clear goal and even though we documented it they have won. However what they have in fact done is committed another crime on an international scale.

Will anyone answer for the crime of subversion and for violating the sovereignty of Ukraine? Not likely. Therefore this should be a serious wake up call to all countries of the world, but will it? Also not likely.

What is striking in Ukraine was that it was a democratically elected government, that all of the US/NATO/EU plans were know from the start and that it was still allowed to proceed.

Once again, as we saw in Iraq, Libya and all other countries where the governments have been recently overthrown and the leader executed or otherwise removed (with North Korea being the perfect example) the only protection that any country has from the imposition of US/NATO/EU regime change is quite simply nuclear weapons.

US/NATO Obama/Neo-Con Plans and Impunity

After 9-11 Neo-Con Paul Wolfowitz, the then US Deputy Secretary of Defense stated that the US Government is now in the business of destroying countries, executing presidents and changing governments at will.

General Wesley Clark who was the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, took issue with the Neo-Con architects from the Project for a New American Century (LINK 5) and gave testimony that the US planned to overthrow seven countries after 9/11: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.

Mr. Clark called the post 9-11 overtaking of the US Government a coup and said it was plotted by Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and "a half dozen other collaborators from the Project for the New American Century". In a report Glen Greenwald cites a US Secretary of Defense Memo which gave even more detail and put a timeframe on the plan: "I just got this memo from the Secretary of Defense's office. It says we're going to attack and destroy the governments in 7 countries in five years – we're going to start with Iraq, and then we're going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran."

Greenwald reported that General Clark was shocked and wrote about the following exchange: "And we've got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet regimes – Syria, Iran [sic], Iraq – before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us." Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz's desires because, as Clark put it: "the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It's not to deter conflicts?"." Clark said he was shocked by Wolfowitz's desires because, as Clark put it: "the purpose of the military is to start wars and change governments? It's not to deter conflicts?"

A New Regime Would Be Illegal

Any regime installed in any way other than trough democratic elections in Ukraine and under the current crisis will be illegal. President Yanukovich despite being weak and some might argue incompetent in maintaining stability in his country, was democratically elected in elections that were recognized by the entire world. This is important to underline.

Even though he was placed in a Catch 22 situation by the West where if he cracked down he would be demonized and if he did not he would be overthrown, his handling of the internal crisis leaves a lot of questions to be answered.

Timing of Ukrainian Coup

It is also important to note the similarities between the timing of the events in Ukraine and the invasion by Georgia of South OssetiaBoth taking place during Olympics and again the words of Neo-Con Paul Wolfowitz: "… we've got about 5 or 10 years to clean up those old Soviet regimes before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us."

Ukraine is the crowning jewel and it looks like they will obtain it.

The views and opinions expressed here are my own. I can be reached at [email protected].

Kiev crisis reminds Russians of what could have been

ft.com

Ms Matviyenko, a member of president Vladimir Putin's ruling United Russia party and the country's third-highest elected leader, carefully balanced her remarks with criticism of the Ukrainian opposition. And yet, the Ukraine-born politician's words stand out sharply in a country which almost unanimously describes the Kiev crisis as a coup attempt of radicals egged on by a west scheming to expand its sphere of influence.

Since the very beginning of the street protests in Kiev, Russia's tame media in general, and its state-controlled television in particular, have been showing the Russian public images of chaos and violence while remaining largely silent about protesters' peaceful demands and the complex political landscape in Ukraine.

Footage of the clashes in Kiev features violence on both sides, but Russian state television continues to focus on victims among the security forces, confirming most Russians' dismissive attitude towards the protests.

The chaos in Ukraine has awakened a latent contempt for a country that many Russians struggle to recognise as a fully independent nation.

While a minority of intellectuals and democracy activists have shown envy or drawn inspiration from Ukraine's protest movement – and blasted the Russian state media for distorting the story – this is far from the majority view.

In particular, for those who experienced the breakdown of the Soviet Union and the stormy 1990s – a period marked by political infighting, food shortages and rampant inflation – a quiet, safe life is more important than anything else.

These are the people who, although more critical of corruption and economic stagnation, keep electing Mr Putin because they cherish stability. Ukraine reminds them of what could have been.

[Feb 17, 2014] Putin Is Playing a Game of His Own

Russian translation is available from InoSMI. From comments: "This professor ccurrently teaches American foreign policy at Yale University. In 2003 Mead supported the war in Iraq. He adhere to the principle of American exceptionalism, belittles the role of the UN. Level of knowledge of Russia is superficial."

But time isn't on Mr. Putin's side. Russia's failure since 1989 to build an effective economy keeps his reach short. U.S. diplomacy may be wobbly, but U.S. development of shale oil and gas attacks the core of Russia's strength. With the U.S. out of the gas-importing business, a lot more natural gas is on world markets, and Gazprom's OGZPY +2.02% customers are demanding better terms. Fracking hurts Mr. Putin in the wallet, and Russia has never had much cash to spare.

Worse, no matter what Russia does, China keeps rising in the East, and Germany is becoming more active in the West. Russia's population is changing, with Muslim minorities growing rapidly and Christian Slavs fading away. Across Russia's south, militant Islamists quietly slip into the mosques and madrassas. As Russian power dissolves, Mr. Putin is left to vamp in the spotlights and do what he can to reverse, postpone or hide the decline.

Considered purely on form, Mr. Putin is easily the world's most accomplished diplomatic tap dancer. (The clumsy Chinese can't make a move without inflaming neighbors worried about their growing power, and the top diplomats of the EU and the U.S.- Catherine Ashton and John Kerry -are often all left feet.) But how long can Putin figure skate while the ice beneath him melts?

Still, Americans should not get too smug. Sometimes smart underdogs win. For Mr. Putin's razzle-dazzle diplomacy to succeed, he needs one thing above all: for his opponents to make mistakes. So far, the U.S. and the EU have given him all the opportunities he could want. If the West doesn't get its act together soon, Mr. Putin just might end up with a brace of gold medals.

-Mr. Mead is a professor at Bard College and the author of "Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the World."

[Feb 13, 2014] Russia's Right Turn by William S. Lind

Feb 11, 2014 | The American Conservative

An unfortunate legacy of the Cold War is the negative attitude some American conservatives yet harbor toward Russia. Conditioned for decades to see Russia and the Soviet Union as synonymous, they still view post-communist Russia as a threat. They forget that Tsarist Russia was the most conservative great power, a bastion of Christian monarchy loathed by revolutionaries, Jacobins, and democrats. Joseph de Maistre was not alone among 19th-century conservatives in finding refuge and hope in Russia.

Under President Vladimir Putin, Russia is emerging once more as the leading conservative power. As we witnessed in Russia's rescue of President Obama from the corner into which he had painted himself on Syria, the Kremlin is today, as the New York Times reports, "Establishing Russia's role in world affairs not based on the dated Cold War paradigm but rather on its different outlook, which favors state sovereignty and status quo stability over the spread of Western-style democracy."

In his own Times op-ed on Syria, Putin wrote, "It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America's long-term interest? I doubt it." Sen. Robert A. Taft and Russell Kirk also doubted it.

Moscow appears to understand better than Washington that the driving foreign-policy requirement of the 21st century is the preservation of the state in the face of Fourth Generation war waged by non-state entities, such as those fighting on the rebels' side in Syria. Russia has rightly upbraided Washington for destroying states, including Iraq and Libya.

[Feb 13, 2014] How international coverage missed the point of the Sochi opening ceremony by Mary Dejevsky

The Guardian

Beckow -> Bob_Helpful

US spent 2 trillion dollars in the last 12 years on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. UK a a few hundred billion. What was that? A "state funded" entertainment for bloody media? Or a bribe to rich arms manufacturers?

Sochi spent officially $15 billion on the Olympics. If you include absolutely everything (railroads, new freeways, new infrastructure, airports,...), $50 billion. What was a better investment? Dropping bombs or building a new subtropical resort region of southern Russia?

Or would you prefer that Russians spend their money on buying real estate and football clubs in UK? That is not "corruption"?

Bob_Helpful -> Beckow

Your funny little rant would work better if I had said that it was a worse investment than spending money on wars. The fact that America spends so much on warfare whilst simultaneously claiming it can't afford to provide basic free medical care to its citizens is bizarre.

What was a better investment? Dropping bombs or building a new subtropical resort region of southern Russia?

An even better investment would be investing in Russian schools and hospitals in my humble opinion. I would rather Russia spent money on helping the plight of the millions of poor people in its country rather than spending so extravagantly on a skiing festival.

Rialbynot -> Bob_Helpful

I suggest you look at a map of Russia.

It is has a very short Black Sea coastline, and it doesn't have many mountains (am thinking of the European part of Russia here).

Lots of Russians want to spend their holidays by the sea and/or ski in the winter.

Where should a country with a short coastline and few mountains with millions of would-be summer and winter tourists build hotels?

Tell me please!

(Admittedly, all of this is not such good news for the tourism business in Cyprus, Greece and Bulgaria, where all the Russian summer tourists used to go, because there was no capacity in Sochi.)

Beckow -> Bob_Helpful

Well, context matters. I provided a context on what countries usually spend their money on. Is your view that until all educational and health needs are satisfied there should be no Olympics, no World Cups, no sport extravaganzas of any kind? Or are you just focused on Russia? If it is just Russia, than what your wrote was just a "rant".

When US built its interstate freeway system there was a lot of complaining about "roads to nowhere". Nowhere sometimes becomes "somewhere". Russia is taking a chance, we will not know for years whether those infrastructure investments in the Sochi region will pay off.

In any case, it seems on its face a better way to use society's resources than bombs or giving it to already wealthy bankers. When you citisise others, you need to be accurate and have some context.

Beckow

The Western coverage missed the point because it really, really, wanted to miss the point. As with so many things in the West petty geo-politics and social obsessions control what Westerners are allowed to see. And I use the word 'allowed' consciously - it is unfortunately a very scripted life that Western masses are fed over and over again.

Was there any mention of slavery or colonial genocides at London, Salt Lake, or Vancouver? No, I didn't think so. Did Bush show as the shock-and-awe as part of the opening ceremonies? There is a place for introspection and there is a place for ceremony, so this harping - and the Mary Dejevsky couldn't stay away from it - is absurd on its face.

What the coverage showed about today's Russia is that West is stuck in an immature, bad mannered tine warp. Traveling around the world looking for that one broken toilet, or the few unfinished rooms, or an angry lesbian, is that what the culture has descended to?

Apart from everything else is has backfired spectacularly: the Russia-haters have come out of it diminished and exposed as frauds. They will continue hating, they will continue their campaigns, but unless the mainstream media dumps them, they will be simply diminished with them.

Hatred and schadenfreude are not interesting. They are poisonous. The consequences are paid for by all. Including the struggling British businessmen who will simply lose out....Cameron knows that, that's why he has been so quiet.

Waterkanter

£30billion for all that infra structure looks rather good value for money when you compare it to the £52billion of HS2. All we'll get is a train set and some rail tracks.

Ameliascottage

One of the best Guardian articles I've seen in years. As an American I love hearing the inside story of a land so far away, one that I hope to visit but may never get to. Oymoyakon looks especially harsh but beautiful.

The Olympic coverage could have been very shallow, but instead it gave me a valuable glimpse and information I never would have had otherwise, presented in an incredibly artful manner.

Anyone who doesn't appreciate it should switch back to their Fox News and let the rest of us enjoy the show.

AnnaKim

Now let's spin the story and imagine what it would be for Britain if other countries were treating you as badly as you treat Russia.

So 2012.

Opening ceremony in London. The shambolic kitschy music circus that was unfolding on stage left the world baffled as 99% percent of the global population didn't get a single cultural reference. Athletes are moaning about the unacceptable quality of food. Journalists discover that London is teeming with feral foxes which are attacking little kids and spreading infectious diseases. Tourists are puzzled by the eerily silent streets in West End unaware of the fact that most Londoners were advised to avoid the Olympics like the plague.

And how dare those treacherous imperialists so grossly distort their own history omitting some of its major highlights - which would most certainly include unleashing deadly opium wars in China, Peterloo massacre, gassing the Kurds in 1920, systematic executions in India, torturing Kenyan rebels in 1950s, hunger strikes in Ireland and many other glorious achievements, not to mention the ongoing victorious war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And last but not least, it's dazzling how the record-breaking financial crisis didn't get any credits in the opening ceremony given that City - the world's biggest virtual money refinery - is just a few miles away from the Olympic park. Perhaps they'd better spend all those billions to cut budget deficit instead of slashing public spending on health and education? Well done guys.

[Feb 13, 2014] Ложь о Древнегреческом гомосексуализме (анализ текстов древнегреческой литературы)

Nov 18, 2013 | LiveJournal

Оригинал взят у rjadovoj_rus в Ложь о Древнегреческом гомосексуализме (анализ текстов древнегреческой литературы).

Оригинал взят у socker_zucchero в Ложь о Древнегреческом гомосексуализме (анализ текстов древнегреческой литературы).

В интернете уже довольно давно блуждают тексты, по поводу нормальности гомосексуализма в древнем мире. Говорят, что чуть ли не каждый древний грек занимался извращениями и это было нормально.

Невежественные люди верят во всё это.

Вот вчера, например, один еврейчик попал в топ за жетончики с подобными письменами. И что меня покоробило, что мои "друзья" за 20 жетончиков эту муть репостнули, это были: leghe, dro63, borman_b, slavka999, slavikap(за 100 жетончиков).

Ну не пидарасы они после этого? Нет, в друзьях пидарасы мне не нужны.

Про античность не все так однозначно:

"В Афинах классического периода гомосексуалисты обязаны были заявлять о своем пороке в экклисию, после чего лишались всех гражданских прав (в том числе и право быть свидетелем в суде). Если же они скрывали свой порок - их подвергали остракизму или казнили.

В Спарте было ещё суровее - никаких заявлений - кто попадался - казнили! Названия гомосексуалист - не существовало, а существовало слово - кинэдос ( что в приблизительном переводе означало - подверженный проклятию).

Как человек, живущий в Греции и имеющий возможность знакомиться с литературой древнего периода и знаю это. А литературу современных гомиков, пытающихся под личиной профессоров или журналистов замутить людям мозги - не читаю - оставляю это для тех, кто еще не понял, что и кем и для чего пишется.....

( Read more...Collapse )

Что касается истории Древней Греции, то я не копаюсь в русскоязычном Интернете, поскольку, находясь в Греции, считаю более серьезным изучение литературы НА ГРЕЧЕСКОМ языке. Тем более, что те несколько переводов на русский, что я встретил, дали мне ясно понять, что они и близко не могут сравниться с оригиналами. Единственное, что они могут - так это ввести в заблуждение! Мне жаль, что русскоговорящие - не имеют возможности знать правды!

Начну с того, что перевод с древнегреческого языка – на какой-либо современный язык таит в себе огромные трудности. И они касаются - перевода смыслового, а не только дословного. Для того чтобы понять смысл написанного, совершенно недостаточно знать дословный перевод слов – необходимо иметь представление о законах и обычаях тех лет, о том мире, в котором создавалась книга!

Итак, Платон - Законы. Читаю в переводе: " …Наслаждение от соединения мужской природы с женской, влекущего за собой рождение, уделено нам от природы, соединение же мужчины с мужчиной и женщины с женщиной - противоестественно и возникло как дерзкая попытка людей, разнузданных в удовольствиях…"

Взято - на http://bookz.ru/authors/platon, автор перевода - мне не известен.


Сравниваю с переводом греческого автора Адониса Георгиадиса - на современный греческий (посматривая и на данный рядом древнегреческий текст): "Понятно, таким образом, что природа побуждает женский пол быть в связи - с мужским полом, от рождения. И ясно, что удовольствие в этом дано СОГЛАСНО ПРИРОДЕ, в то же время (связь) мужского пола - с мужским и женского пола – с женским – ПРОТИВ ПРИРОДЫ…"
Что ж, для начала хоть смысл не украден!

Однако, читая дальше русский перевод – не нахожу, к большому сожалению, ещё одной важной фразы, гласящей: "Тот, кто слушаясь природу, предлагает восстановление закона таким, каким он был до Лайо (мифического первооткрывателя гомосексуализма, который за это был осужден судьбой - на смерть от руки своего сына) и проповедует, что неправильно вступать в связь с мужчинами и юношами, как с женщинами, приводя в доказательство этого природу животных и подчеркивая, что (между собой) существо мужского пола не дотрагивается до другого существа мужского пола с сексуальной целью, ввиду того, что это – неестественно, находится, считаю, на очень сильной позиции…"


Читаю далее: "… Граждане наши, не должны быть хуже птиц и других видов животных, что рождаются в стаях и живут без совокупления до возраста деторождения, непорочные и несвязанные браком, но когда достигнут того возраста, образовывают пары мужское с женским и женское – с мужским, согласно своим желаниям и оставшуюся жизнь живут в благочестии и почитании законов, оставаясь верными тем соглашениям, которые были основой их связи. Они (граждане) должны быть ещё лучше чем животные…" И далее: "… Никто не должен сметь вступать в связь с благородными и свободными, кроме их собственной жены, и даже не позволяется распространять внебрачное семя среди наложниц или вступать в связь с мужчинами, что есть противоестественно, и лучше связь между мужчинами запретим совершенно…" Это говорит Платон, обвиненный некоторыми нечистоплотными историками - в прославлении гомосексуализма…..

Хочу спросить, как сейчас назовут человека, высказывающего такие пожелания? При условии, что когда в Афинской демократии употребляли слово запретить – это означало смерть для нарушившего? Сейчас только за пожелание запрета парада гомосексуалистов вас нарекут фашистом!

Теперь немного науки – лексилогии! Возьмем словарь древнегреческого Лиддел-Скотта, как одного из точнейших: "эрамэ" - очень сильно желаю, чувствую влюблённость, нахожусь в состоянии любви, люблю безудержно; "эрастис" - тот, кто имеет "эраме" по отношению к любимым людям; "эроменос" (с ударением на первое "о") в связи с "эрао" - имею влюбленность, люблю. Когда в речи употребляется слово "люблю" – это не значит обязательно – "хочу в сексуальном плане". Также как и в русском языке, выражение "люблю своего отца или мать, сестру, товарища, учителя, Родину …" совершенно не имеет никакой связи с сексом, и слово "люблю" часто означает привязанность и жертвенность по отношению к предмету любви, также и в древнегреческом языке слово "эраме" употреблялось в аналогичном смысле. В современном же греческом языке, сильно обедневшем и выродившемся, слова с корнями "эр" относятся чаще уже к более узкому кругу желаний – сексуальному.

Поэтому, в отличие от древнегреческого, слово "эроменос" переводится как любимый (в сексуальном плане), а "эрастис" – как любовник. Что в корне не соответствует смыслу, имеющему место в древнегреческом.

Перейдем, теперь, к другому слову древнегреческого языка – "педерастия" -"детолюбие". В Древней Греции жизнь текла не по современным законам, а вернее – не по современному беззаконию! Каждый юноша с 12 лет выбирал себе образ для подражания – какого-либо из граждан, либо нескольких граждан. Главная роль в наблюдении за правильностью этих отношений лежала на Димосе (гражданах) Афин. Здесь дело не ограничивалось простым желанием походить на кого-либо, но основывалось на прочных отношениях, зачастую более крепких и основательных чем семейные. Это были отношения ученика и наставника, где роль наставника была неизмеримо выше отцовской. Будущему гражданину предоставлялась, таким образом, возможность избежать плохого влияния родителей и самому выбрать того, на кого он хочет походить!

Поскольку такая связь предполагала большую открытость для контроля со стороны Димоса, чем семейная, она была внушительной гарантией правильного развития граждан – таких, которые были выгодны Афинскому Димосу.
Отношения между учеником и наставником, многими гражданами, считались более высокого уровня - по сравнению с семейными. Любовь наставника к ученику, зачастую, ставилась выше любви отца - к сыну. То же относилось и к любви ученика – к наставнику. Наставник назывался всегда – "эрастис" (любящий) а ученик – "эроменос" (любимый), подчеркивая главенствующую роль первого и подчиненную роль второго.

Позже, когда ученик достигал совершеннолетия, и если он сохранял почтительную дружескую связь со своим наставником, эти названия - "эрастис" и "эроменос" могли оставаться за ними до самой смерти, подчеркивая характер дружбы между ними, так же, как за сыном навсегда закрепляется название – "сын", а за отцом, независимо от возраста – название "отец"! Какого бы возраста они не были, эрастисом называли всегда старшего, а младшему отводилась роль эроменоса. Прошу заметить это, поскольку защитники теории гомосексуализма и педерастии в Древней Греции ссылаются на дословный ПЕРЕВОД СОВРЕМЕННЫХ слов "эрастис" (активная, производящая сторона в отношениях) и "эроменос" (пассивная, принимающая сторона) и говорят о гомосексуальных отношениях.

Но все знают, что отношения между гомосексуалистами не строятся на возрастном принципе: и тот, кто старше – не обязательно всегда является активным гомосексуалистом, а тот, кто моложе – всегда пассивным.… В древнегреческой же литературе "эрастис" всегда старший по возрасту, "эроменос" - всегда младший, что уже само - по себе заставляет заподозрить даже самых тупоголовых, что речь здесь идет не о гомосексуальных отношениях…

Так же как и во многих традиционных обществах, отношения между учеником и его идеалом не были простыми мечтаниями и любованием! Эрастис – наставник прямым образом "лепил-ваял" будущего гражданина-эроменоса. Быть образцом для подражания было почетно, но сопряжено и с обязанностями – не уронить себя в глазах ребенка или юноши, который тебя обожает и старается выполнить любое твое желание, но ещё хуже – быть обвиненным Димосом в неправильном воспитании ученика. Если же речь шла о возможном развращении эроменоса со стороны его эрастиса (включая и сексуальное развращение) – то в этом случае наказанием была смерть! В древних Афинах (о Спарте даже и не говорю), для исключения любой возможности совращения малолетних существовали довольно суровые по нашим меркам законы!

"Речи Эсхина. Против Тимарха" гл.12. (Эсхину логи: ката Тимарху): "…Учителя не должны открывать школы раньше рассвета и закрывать – раньше захода. Не разрешается тому, кто старше 13, лет входить в школу в момент, когда там находятся дети, за исключением, если он является сын, брат или зять учителя. Нарушитель карается СМЕРТЬЮ. Гимнасты-наставники, во время праздников Гермеса, обязаны не допускать никого из совершеннолетних - никоим образом сидеть рядом с детьми. Гимнаст-наставник, позволяющий нечто подобное и не выгоняющий из гимназии нарушителя – является виновным по закону о развращении свободных детей. Снабженцы, которых назначает Димос (народ), должны обязательно иметь возраст более сорока лет".

Там же в гл.16: "… если какой-либо афинянин "ивриси" (обесчестит, развратит, осквернит …) свободного юношу, тогда "кириос" (здесь – взрослый опекун, родитель) юноши должен направить письменное заявление прокурорам и требовать его (виновного) наказания. Если суд его осудит, то он должен быть предан одиннадцати палачам и казнен в тот же день. Если же будет осужден к денежному штрафу, то заплатит в течение одиннадцати дней с момента приговора. Если же не имеет возможности выплатить в тот же момент, до момента выплаты должен быть под заключением в тюрьме. Виновные за те же преступления считаются и те, которые делают то же самое по отношению - к рабам"….

В другом законе, обозначенном в речи Демосфена против Мидия, и принадлежащем Солону: " Тот кто подталкивает к разврату детей, женщину или мужчину, свободного или раба, или совершает противозаконные действия в ущерб кого-либо из них – пусть будет обвинен любым афинянином перед законодателями. Законодатели же, в течение тридцати дней с момента заявления, учинят над ним суд, если позволяют условия. Если же будет рассмотрен судом и если будет признан виновным – осуждается к смерти или штрафу"…

Весьма суровые на наш взгляд законы.

А теперь о гомосексуалистах!

К гомосексуалистам, (не говоря уже о развратниках детей, которых обычно казнили), отношение было презрительное, как к чему-то скверному, нечистому и … опасному! "Речи Эсхина. Против Тимарха. 21гл.": "Если какой-либо афинянин "этериси" (будет любовником у мужчины), ему запрещается: 1) быть одним из девяти архонтов, 2) быть священником, 3) быть защитником (адвокатом) на суде, 4) занимать какую-либо должность внутри и вне Афинского Димоса (государства), как по жребию, так и по выбору, 5) исполнять обязанности глашатая или избирать глашатая, 6) входить в священные общественные места, участвовать в религиозных литургиях с венком на голове и находиться в той части агоры (древнее место городского схода и рынок), которая освящена окроплением. Нарушитель вышеназванных указаний, в случае если будет признан виновным (в вышеназванном) – наказывается смертью"….

Демосфен в своей речи "Против Андротиона", в параграфе 30, упоминает, что Солон утвердил закон в отношении гомосексуалистов: "Мите легин Мите графин эксине тис итерискосин" - "даже право говорить, даже право делать обвинения не имеют (в суде) те, которые "этериси".

Там же "Речи Эсхина. Против Тимарха." гл.185: " … таковы, господа судьи, взгляды наших предков на честных и бесчестных женщин. И вы теперь объявите невиновным Тимарха, который виновен в более противном грехопадении. Он же, будучи рожден мужчиной с мужским телом, опустился до того грехопадения, которое подобает женщинам. Кто из вас после этого сможет обвинить женщину в грехопадении. Кто из вас посмеет выказать такие неуместные идеи, чтобы с одной стороны казаться суровым по отношению к какой-либо женщине, которая в конечном итоге ГРЕШИТ СОГЛАСНО СВОЕЙ ПРИРОДЕ, а с другой стороны возьмет к себе советчиком того, кто втаптывает в грязь самого себя, нарушая, в том числе и законы природы". Здесь Тимарх был обвинен в мужской проституции.

Итак, как вы видите, что-то непонятное для непосвященного раскрывается перед взором. С одной стороны многочисленные заявления о поощрении гомосексуализма и детского разврата в классической Греции со стороны ряда так называемых "исследователей", а с другой – упоминания о суровых законах против тех же самых гомосексуалистов и развратников в древней литературе. Так в чем же дело? Что-то здесь не так! Не может быть двух противоположных правд….
Наша слабость, позволяющая манипулировать нашим представлением об истории – наше незнание законов и обычаев Старого Мира и наше незнание древних языков.

Ложь о Древней Греции, к примеру, приобрела поистине гигантские размеры. Историей Древней Греции часто занимаются люди, не обладающие элементарным логическим мышлением, не умеющие или не желающие производить анализ того, что они переводят или описывают. Правда замалчивается или искажается - до состояния лжи. Непосвященные, читающие переводы и не знающие античной истории и древнегреческого, не догадываются, что их вводят в заблуждения не только неправильные переводы слов, но и слова, имеющие в наше распутное время совершенно ИНОЙ СМЫСЛ!!! Создается извращенный образ прошлого!

Таким образом, искажая историю, наше больное общество защищается от любых попыток правдивого анализа, боясь, что в прошлом есть нечто такое, что может поставить под сомнение верность навязываемого нам образа жизни. Еще большей ненавистью пышет к древнегреческому образу жизни и мысли – христианский ДОГМАТИЗМ.

В своем желании безраздельно овладеть умами людей, он пытается доказать всему миру, что христианство спасло мир от чего-то ужасного и скверного, и что оно – единственный возможный выбор современного человека… Особую роль в искажении истории занимают современные защитники гомосексуализма, которые "коверкая" историю, пытаются доказать, что гомосексуализм – есть нечто физиологичное и естественное, приводя "примеры" из истории Древней Греции. Что уже само по себе – высшая степень наглости….
Итак, Robert Flaceliere "Эротас в Древней Греции": "Как все мы знаем, греческий эрос (эротас) есть любовь юношей и точнее – педерастия. Но это слово - "педерастия" во Французском означает почти всегда – извращение, в то время как в греческих текстах – непорочную и бескорыстную любовь, а не гомосексуальные связи".

В современных языках, как русском, так и греческом, не существует слов, которые могли бы охарактеризовать древнегреческое выражение - "эрастис" и "эроменос". Как я уже написал ранее, ближе всего стоит выражение – "наставник" и "ученик" или "подопечный", хотя и эти слова очень далеки от истинного смысла. Чем же характеризовались отношения между "эрастисом" и "эроменосом"? Это была мужская дружба, где главенствовал старший, а младший пытался всячески походить на своего наставника и всячески доказывать свою преданность ему. Быть "эрастисом" умного, красивого, смелого юноши считалось показателем качества гражданина. Знаменитые, выдающиеся граждане являлись "эрастисами" для многих молодых людей. Естественно, некоторые граждане (как это всегда бывает с людьми), не имея необходимых достоинств, пытались подкупить молодых людей, чтобы те заявляли во всеуслышание о том, что они являются их наставниками – "эрастисами". Такие факты высмеивались как в комедиях того времени, так и в карикатурах. Осуждения заслуживали и те из "эрастисов", которые выдвигали непомерные требования к своим подопечным или заставляли их выполнять непосильные задания…

Чем же была "педерастия" в Древней Греции? Эта великая связь мужчин - граждан и юношей – их поклонников, стремящихся походить на свои идеалы, теперь не существует. Современный человек не может себе представить, что юноша, готовясь стать гражданином, может по настоящему любить и восторгаться своим идеалом. И что этот идеал – старается быть на высоте своего предназначения. В пошлом уме современного человечка, выросшего без четких понятий о плохом и хорошем, о достойном и низком - всегда крутится пошлая идейка, что любовь двух мужчин, настоящая мужская любовь – это желание низкой гомосексуальной связи – а не любовь двух товарищей – старшего и младшего. И что это может иметь место под солнцем. Даже слово – любовь – стараются избегать (ещё припишут чего-то там … извращенного). Предвижу, что с развитием современного общества, скоро на вопрос "А любите ли вы детей?", ответ будет следовать громкий и незамедлительный – "Ну что вы? Как вы себе такое позволяете? За такие вопросы – морду бить надо!" "А любите ли вы маму?" - "Вы что, издеваетесь? Как можно любить маму? Она же мать! Как вам не стыдно!". А я считаю, что слово любовь – неплохое слово!"

Источник текста http://christianfront.group.ws/2013/05/lozh-o-drevnegrecheskom-gomoseksualizme/

всех неравнодушных прошу перепостить!

[Feb 13, 2014] Главный желудь

LiveJournal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Zp-wvgZwy4w

На 7.44 Начиная с этой минуты Мюллер объясняет главное.

А в целом - великолепная, эталонная актерская работа... Да и монолог этот оказался не просто пророческим, но пророческим несколько раз. :-)

[Feb 10, 2014] Opening Ceremonies and First Race by Noah Hoffman

A lot of interesting pictures...
Noah Hoffman

OK, so maybe that doesn't count as a creative title but at least it's DIFFERENT than the last three.

It's been an incredible 24 hours. Time is flying. By the time I finished blogging yesterday I had about 10 minutes to get dressed for opening ceremonies. It was a little frantic. Luckily the time we were requested to be ready had a built in cushion before we actually needed to leave. They must know that promptness is a struggle for some of us. The extra time gave us a chance to take some group pictures. Kris Freeman, Torin Koos, Liz Stephen, Holly Brooks, Sadie Bjornsen and Kikkan Randall all decided they couldn't afford the time and energy to go to the ceremonies. I respect their decision, but I'm so glad I chose to go. Liz, Holly, Kikkan and Sadie got dressed in their outfits to take pictures with us before we headed down. Here is our entire team less Kris, Torin and Simi Hamilton (who was down visiting his family before the ceremonies). (Top row left to right: Bryan Gregg, Andy Newell, Erik Bjornsen and myself; bottom row left to right: Holly, Sadie, Kikkan, Liz, Sophie Caldwell, Jessie Diggins and Ida Sargent.)

Европа не прощает тех, кто не хочет быть ею проглочен by Anatolij Wassermann

awas1952

Anatolij Wassermann (awas1952) wrote,
2014-02-11

Не допускается амнистия правоохранителей, совершивших тяжкое преступление - комиссар Совета Европы. Информационное агентство Ук

КИЕВ. 10 февраля. УНН. Амнистия по определению не может быть применена к задержанным, которые не виновны и не должна применяться к милиционерам, которые совершили тяжкие преступления. Об этом во время пресс-конференции журналистам сказал комиссар Совета Европы по правам человека Нилс Муйжниекс, передает корреспондент УНН.

"Амнистия может применяться только к лицам, чья вина была признана, а не просто к любым задержанным, даже если это были прохожие. По международному праву амнистия не может быть применена при совершении тяжких преступлений, а именно такими были действия некоторых украинских работников милиции", - пояснил комиссар СЕ свою позицию относительно закона об амнистии, согласно которому от наказания освобождаются как задержанные протестующие, так и правоохранители, которые били митингующих.

Во время встречи с министром внутренних дел В.Захарченко он призвал его привлечь к ответственности тех работников милиции, которые применяли чрезмерную силу - поливали из водометов на морозе, били дубинками по голове, целились в работников прессы.

"Безнаказанности для людей не должно быть", - подчеркнул Н.Муйжниекс.

Верить никому нельзя. Мне - можно.

Русская национальная идея выражается ОДНИМ словом: СПРАВЕДЛИВОСТЬ.
И всё тут.

[Feb 10, 2014] Diagnosing Sochi Media Coverage Virulent Russophobia by Justin Raimondo

Antiwar.com

Any illusions some naïve soul may have had about the objectivity of the US media has been dispelled by their embarrassing performance at the Sochi Olympics: the chorus of whining complaints might as well have been written for them by the US State Department – which, come to think of it, is entirely within the realm of the possible given the imperious tone. The water, the toilets, the hotelsnothing pleases our pampered media divas, whose hatred of all things Russian oozes from between the lines of their "reporting" like pus from an old wound.

All the antipathy we saw aimed at Russia during the cold war years is now being revomited up by the political class, albeit in a new flavor: instead of genuine martyrs like Andrei Sakharov and Alexandr Solzhenitsyn being lionized, we see the professional provocateurs of "Pussy Riot" elevated by Western media to the status of "dissident" stars. Why do these heavily made-up show biz types merit our attention? Well, didn't they desecrate a Russian Orthodox cathedral by stripping off their clothes, screaming obscenities, and insulting parishioners? Clearly this is the type of "dissident" the American media can get behind. (Try that in New York City, ladies, and see what happens.)

Our shameless media is always eager to place itself at the disposal of the State. If it isn't David Gregory calling for the arrest of Glenn Greenwald, it's the ubiquitous Richard Engel of NBC "News" – tireless cheerleader of US-sponsored "revolutions" abroad – deliberately downloading a virus onto his computer and then pontificating about how the minute you enter Russia you are bound to be "hacked."

In the midst of this orgy of Russophobia, the foul-mouthed Victoria Nuland's leaked conversation went viral over the Internet, exposing the real extent of Washington's stake in the latest anti-Russian campaign, Ukraine being the battleground this time. Not that it wasn't fairly obvious before, what with US diplomats demanding an end to government "repression" against rioting violent "protesters," but the Nuland intercept made the strings tying the Ukrainian opposition to Washington starkly visible.

Ooops!

But wait – didn't the cold war end with the downing of the Berlin Wall and the implosion of the old USSR? So how did it get reignited – and who lit the fuse?

It started, as so many of these overseas vendettas do, when the Russkies earned the ire of the neocons by 1) Overthrowing communism, thus depriving several leading neocons of their jobs as professional anti-communists, 2) throwing out the hated oligarchs, who had looted what was left of Russia after the commies got through with it, and 3) refusing to go along with the Iraq war, and blocking US intervention in Syria. Granting Edward Snowden refuge was the absolute last straw – a tactic that inverted the familiar cold war narrative by casting the Russians as the patrons of dissidence and the Americans as their relentless pursuers.

Yes, this is my ultimate proof that we have indeed entered the Bizarro Era, where up is down and history stood on its head: even the terms of the Russo-American propaganda war have been reversed. It used to be that Russian propaganda was the worst of the worst: wooden, unconvincing, ideological gibberish expressed in the crudest possible terms. The Americans, on the other hand, were relatively sophisticated about it, covertly spreading Washington's party line through a multitude of mostly center-left "fronts," like the Congress for Cultural Freedom and Encounter magazine, which weren't exposed until well after they had served their purpose.

Now, however, those roles are reversed, and it is the Americans who are stumbling over themselves trying to make Sochi (and Putin) look bad, and only revealing their utter incompetence – while the Russians broadcast Nuland's vulgar king-making to the world.

Ukraine has been a battleground in the new cold war since the early days of the new millennium, back when the "Orange Revolution" was all the rage in the Western media and the martyrdom of Viktor Yushechenko was the driving narrative that toppled the pro-Russian government of the "Party of Regions," the Eastern-oriented pro-Russian party then in power.

The official story, as pushed relentlessly in the Western media until it became the Conventional Wisdom, was that Yushchenko, the pro-Western ex-central banker and presidential candidate, had been poisoned by the KGB for daring to defy Putin and his Ukrainian sock-puppets.

This story began to unravel, however, when several medical authorities – including the former chief diagnostician of the facility that treated Yushchenko, Dr. Lothar Wicke – called it into question. Yushchenko didn't help matters when he refused to cooperate with the Ukrainian investigation into the matter, and suspicion turned to certainty when his old campaign manager, David Zhvania confessed that the whole thing had been a fraud from the beginning. A reporter who dared interview Zhvania was hauled into police headquarters and interrogated for seven hours. Perhaps Yushchenko's decline into his present status of political irrelevance can be traced to his response to Zhvania's confession – he accused Zhvania, the godfather of one of his children and once his closest confidante, of being the culprit!

So much for the Putin-did-it narrative.

What's happening today in Ukraine is a replay of an old struggle that cannot be resolved except by the partition of the country, which is not a real nation but merely an administrative unit of the old Soviet Union. This article explains the cultural divide well: the truth is that Russian is the language of choice in Ukraine, and as far as the Internet is concerned, Ukrainian language sites come in third behind Russian and English.

Yet the historical antipathy to Russia still lives in the Western part of the country, where the opposition is strongest, and where – not coincidentally – support for the Germans during World War II was greatest. I may be in danger of violating Godwin's Law, but the undeniable legacy of wartime pro-German sentiment is felt in the growing influence of ultra-rightist groups such as Svoboda and outright neo-Nazi organizations within the opposition. They are the shock troops of what they call a "national revolution," providing the organizational muscle for violent takeovers by the opposition of city halls around the country. The brazen anti-Semitism of the anti-government protesters has been studiously ignored in most of the Western media – but this is just a function of their requisite Russophobia, which frames every news story from the region in cold war terms.

Nuland's cursing out of the EU is just a dispute among thieves about who gets the loot; the Germans have a different candidate in mind to preside over the EU takeover of the country, while the Americans have their own plans – with a different cast of beneficiaries. What's revealing about her little exchange with an underling is the casualness with which the Americans move Ukrainian politicians around on the chessboard, just like the Kremlin used to. One doubts Putin exercises half as much influence over Yanukovich.

Confirming George Orwell's theory that sport, international games, and militant nationalism are all inextricably intertwined, Sochi is the stage on which the new cold war is being fought. The battlefield is in the column inches given over in the Western media to the alleged shortcomings of Putin's "Potemkin Village," as the critics are calling it. However, the nature of their complaints – the lack of luxuries to which they feel entitled, and which much of the rest of the world goes largely without – just underscores the utter cluelessness of Western propagandists posing as "reporters." They fail to understand why this makes them look bad to everyone outside of Brooklyn's hipster precincts and Washington's tonier neighborhoods.

The post-cold war strategy of the Americans has been to encircle the Russians, building an iron wall of alliances and military bases from the Baltic Sea to the steppes of Central Asia. The Clinton administration set up a special department devoted to development of Caspian Sea energy resources, and made a determined outreach to the post-Soviet potentates of the various 'stans – ruthless dictators like the President-for-Life of Kazakhstan and the former despot in charge of Turkmenistan, who has been called the Kim Jong Il of Central Asia. The series of "color revolutions" in the former Soviet republics, from Georgia to Ukraine to Kyrgyzstan, were all generously funded and directed from afar by US government agencies, with the Western media playing a familiar role as their echo chamber.

The same scam is being played out in the media today, with the viciously anti-Semitic and violent "opposition" portrayed as heroes of "democracy," and the pro-Russian factions (a majority of the country) cast as villains. And looming over this trumped up scenario is the threat of Western intervention, as in the case of Kosovo and Bosnia. The media's war against the Russians is the kind of virtual onslaught that can ultimately result in a military offensive – we saw this in the run up to the invasion of Iraq, as well as the Balkan wars, and we are seeing it again in the propaganda campaign waged against the Iranians in the past few years.

[Feb 9, 2014] Cold War Politics in Sochi by Stephen Lendman

February 9, 2014 | freedomsphoenix.com

On February 6, the XXII Olympic Winter Games began. A geopolitically tense atmosphere prevails.

Security is extremely tight. It's prioritized for good reason. Terrorist attacks are possible. Don't discount potential Washington shenanigans.

Perhaps raining on Putin's parade is planned. Obama may want him embarrassed. False flags are a longstanding US tradition. Will Sochi be Washington's next target? The fullness of time will tell.

It's a virtual armed camp. Measures in place are unprecedented. Around $2 billion was spent on security.

Ahead of February 6, around 23,000 personnel assured proper measures were in place as planned.

Tens of thousands of police officers are deployed. They're backed by helicopters, drones, gunboats, submarines, and 70,000 Russian troops.

Hundreds of Cossacks are involved. They'll check IDs. They'll detain suspects. Sochi's proximity to the North Caucasus raised concerns.

Islamist jihadists named it a target. They're US assets. They're used strategically. Washington used likeminded ones against Soviet Russia in Afghanistan.

Libya was targeted this way. They comprise America's anti-Syrian proxy death squads.

Russia raised concerns after December Volgograd bombings killed 34 people. Were Washington's dirty hands involved?

Is something similar planned for Sochi? Hegemons operate this way. America is by far the worst. Anything ahead is possible.

According to Sochi Organizing Committee chairman Dmitry Chernyshenko:

"Terrorism is a global threat, and for terrorism there is no boundaries, no territories, but here in Sochi from the very beginning of the construction phase the state authorities did their utmost to prepare special measures, starting from the screening of raw materials, checking all the venues and preparing far-reaching security measures to provide the safest ever environment here."

A controlled zone was established. It covers 60 kilometers. It runs along the coast. It extends 25 kilometers inland.

It includes all venues. They're heavily guarded. The entire area is for authorized visitors only.

Western anti-Russian sentiment persists. Cold War politics continues. Putin bashing is featured. He's not about to roll over for Washington.

He wants rule of law principles respected. He opposes Western imperialism. He's against meddling in the internal affairs of Russia, Syria, Ukraine and other nations.

He stresses Moscow's "independent foreign policy." He affirms the "inalienable right to security for all states, the inadmissibility of excessive force, and unconditional observance of international law."

He and Obama disagree on fundamental geopolitical issues. Key is national sovereignty. So are war and peace. America claims a divine right to fight. Putin prioritizes diplomatic conflict resolution.

Disagreements between both countries play out in dueling agendas. Washington notoriously plays hardball. Putin protects Russia's national interests. They're too important to sacrifice.

US media scoundrels target him. They vilify him. They mischaracterize him. They call him a Russian strongman. They make all kinds of baseless accusations.

Lies, damns lies and misinformation substitute for truth and full disclosure. They want him embarrassed. They're raining on his Sochi parade.

On February 6, the Financial Times headlined "Putin gambles all on creation myth behind Sochi."

"I am particularly pleased to see what is happening here because I chose this place myself," he said.

"It must have been in 2001 or 2002," he added. "(W)e were driving around and arrived at this brook, and I : 'Let's start from here.' That's how it all began."

Putin staked much on the games, said the FT. George Washington University's Sufian Zhemukhov said "(i)f all goes well, (he'll) be seen as the leader who resurrected Russia."

Failure perhaps won't be forgiven, he added. His forthrightness for peace "made him a force on the world stage," said the FT.

A January Levada Center poll showed he'd be elected today by a wide margin. At the same time, his overall support dropped.
Excluding undecided respondents, its "higher than ever."

He's taking no chances. He's going all out to make Sochi successful. FT comments were tame compared to America's media.

The Wall Street Journal headlined "The Putin Games." He wants them to "showcase...modern Russia."

"(H)e succeeded (but) not as he intended...What could go wrong?" Sochi is the most expensive Olympics in history.

Around $50 billion was spent. It's five times the original estimate. It's double what Britain's 2012 summer games cost. It's a fourth more than China spent in 2008.

Much of Sochi's cost related to building vital infrastructure. It had to be done from scratch. Doing so added enormously to costs.

Major projects are expensive. According to Journal editors, "(t)he games are proving to be a case study in the Putin political and economic method."

They claim billions of dollars "lost to corruption." They provide no evidence proving it. They said "Russians call this Olympiad the Korimpiad."

More Putin bashing followed. It's standard scoundrel media practice. Journal editors feature it.

They claim he "made it impossible to hold his regime accountable through free elections or media."

Fact check:

Russian elections shame America's sham ones. They're democratic. They not rigged. Monied interests don't control them.

Outcomes aren't predetermined. Russian voters decide. US ones have no say.

Don't expect Journal editors to explain. Or how Voice of Russia and RT (formerly Russia Today) shame America's corporate media.

They feature news, information and opinion viewers most need to know. They do it forthrightly. They're polar opposite America's managed news misinformation.

Truth is systematically suppressed. Demagoguery, propaganda, scandal, sleaze, junk food news, and warmongering substitute.

Journal editors ignore truth and full disclosure. Bias permeates their opinions. They betray readers. They shame themselves doing so.

They claimed billions spent on Sochi left it unprepared. They cite "unfinished hotel rooms, incomplete road work and now the famous photographs of two toilets in a single stall."

RT.com responded. On February 6, it headlined "Spread fear, toilet humor? MSM guide to 'Worst. Olympics. EVAR!" (Repeat: EVAR!)

Even before the opening ceremony, MSM scoundrels drew conclusions "Sports? Not really," said RT. At issue is malicious Putin bashing. It's longstanding practice.

It's MSM's "own Sochi 2014 moan-athon." Imagine claiming something yet to occur the "worst Olympics ever." They beat up on Beijing the same way.

They "never believed in Sochi," said RT. They called its climate unfit for winter games. They cite corruption with no substantiating evidence.

They claim lax security despite unprecedented measures in place. They discuss possible terrorist threats. They leave unexplained what most worrisome - a possible disruptive US false flag attack.

It bears repeating. Perhaps Washington plans raining on Putin's parade.

On August 7, 2008, hours before Beijing's summer Olympics' opening ceremony, Georgia's Mikheil Saakashvili invaded South Ossetia. He did so at Washington's behest. Attacking was strategically timed.

After Soviet Russia's 1991 dissolution, South Assetia broke away from Georgia. It declared independence. It's home to many Russian nationals.

Moscow responded responsibly. Conflict continued for days. Then President Medvedev was on vacation. Then Prime Minister Putin was in Beijing.

In half a day before Russia intervened, 1,700 people were killed. Included were 12 Russian peacekeepers.

Moscow was blamed for Georgian aggression. Does Washington plan something similar this time? Will a false flag attack occur?

Will Obama usurp a freer hand in Ukraine? Will he take advantage in Syria? Does he plan other mischief? Is disrupting Sochi planned?

Hegemons operate this way. Washington's disturbing history gives Russia good reason for concern.

Preparations in Sochi aren't perfect, said RT. "(F)laws and problems" exist. "But what makes the Sochi Olympics 'the worst' so far is...accommodation for the global media elite."

"See it, slam it," said RT. "Intrepid Olympic reporters, we thought, would get behind the scenes, unravel the PR."

"Nope. Not this time. Of global importance were rooms (if they were available), toilets, floors, and shower curtains."

"Oh - and a request to not flush toilet paper (it's rarely done in public toilets) had the press pack throwing up."

Washington Post reporter Kathy Lally was upset about "a tiny, tiny (hotel room) sink."

It "sits atop an exposed white plastic pipe, stuck to the wall and surrounded by an unruly gob of caulk," she said.

"The single room has two lamps - which don't have light bulbs, but that's okay because they aren't near any unused outlets."

Other journalists reported missing shower curtains, lamps, chairs, inadequate heat and hot water, and whatever else they wanted to cite to bash Putin.

Fox News called conditions "laughably bad." It warned about event coverage being just as dreadful.

MSM scoundrels feature daily "hotel horror stories." They regurgitate similar tweets to each other. They find new reasons to complain.

BBC journalist Steve Rosenberg tweeted about two sit-down toilets shown side-by-side with no partition. It went viral.

RT calls it a "must have" for every Sochi story. Imagine toilet humor substituting for real journalism. It gets worse.

Whatever is happening in Russia multiple time zones away gets reported. A Moscow school shooting creates Sochi shudders.

So does a derailed gas-laden freight train exploding. It happened 500 miles northeast of Moscow. It made Sochi headlines.

CNN connected Sochi to the September 2004 Beslan school siege. Its February 5 report :

"Amid the shrill noise of militant threats ahead of the Sochi Olympic Winter Games, the gym in Beslan is now steeped in silence, a monument to the dead, untouched almost."

Trashing Sochi bashes Putin. MSM scoundrels are deplorable. They disgrace themselves before dwindling audiences.

CNN and other US cable news networks report increasing to fewer viewers. Maybe one day they'll all tune out.

RT called Sochi the "biggest construction site in the world over the past seven years."

"Everything there - most of the hotels, sport venues, high-speed rail links, highways, 50 bridges, even the Olympic village itself - was built from scratch."

It's an extraordinary achievement in a short time. It's almost like building an entirely new city in record time. Sochi deserves praise, not criticism.

Toronto Star reporter Rosie Dimanno wrote:

"Mounds of debris, parts of roads unpaved, mesh hoarding to hide the eyesore bits, lots of trash, unreliable power - nothing upsets journalists more than an internet that goes up and down - these have all featured in Olympics over the past three decades, as the Games have grown too big, too gaudy and too complicated."

"The Olympics are no (place) for old sissies," she added. "So I'll take my own advice: Just chill."

Most MSM scoundrels report as expected. They mock legitimate journalism. It's verboten in America. It's lacking in Canada. It's largely absent in Western Europe. Managed news misinformation substitutes.

WSJ editors called Sochi "a shrine to authoritarianism." They bashed Putin relentlessly. One bald-faced lie followed others.

"(T)he underbelly of Mr. Putin's regime (was) exposed," they claimed.

New York Times editors were just as bad. They headlined "A Spotlight on Mr. Putin's Russia," saying:

"(T)he reality of (his) Russia...conflicts starkly with Olympic ideals and fundamental human rights."

"There is no way to ignore the dark side - the soul-crushing repression, the cruel new anti-gay and blasphemy laws, and the corrupt legal system in which political dissidents are sentenced to lengthy terms on false charges."

Fact check

NYT editors have a longstanding disturbing history. They one-sidedly support wealth, power and privilege. Whenever Washington wages imperial wars or plans them, they march in lockstep.

They long ago lost credibility. They feature mind-numbing misinformation. They violate their own journalistic code doing so.

They invented anti-gay law controversy. Russian gay propaganda law has nothing to do with persecuting people for their sexual orientation.

Everyone's rights are respected. Russia wants its children protected from malicious anti-gay propaganda, illicit drugs, alcohol abuse and whatever else harms them.

Responsible governance demands it. America leaves millions of children unprotected. Cutting food stamps alone denies them vital nutrition.

Don't expect Times editors to explain. Or about thousands of political prisoners languishing in America's gulag.

About torture being official US policy. About rigged US elections. About impoverishing neoliberal harshness.

About destroying social America. About eliminating America's middle class. About waging war on freedom.

About unprecedented levels of public and private corruption. About kleptocracy masquerading as democracy.

About out-of-control corporate empowerment. About Washington being corporate occupied territory. About crushing organized labor.

About commodifying public education. About ignoring international, constitutional and US statute laws.

About violating fundamental human and civil rights. About Obama's war on humanity.

Bashing Putin takes precedence. Managed news misinformation proliferates.

Times editors report like other media scoundrels. MSM ones long ago lost credibility. They replicate the worst of each other.

They support what demands condemnation. They back wrong over right. Readers and viewers demand better.

MSM scoundrels don't deliver. Sochi games run through February 23. Expect lots more Putin bashing ahead.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected].

His new book is titled "Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

[Feb 09, 2014] Tensions between US and Russia hang over Sochi despite strong opening by Owen Gibson

Nice media poodle... Diligently barking at the object the owner pointed to... See also British hypocrisy
8 February 2014 | The Guardian

Picking your way through Sochi's Olympic Park at night is like weaving through a giant car park in which a series of jaw-dropping spaceships have landed at random.

The brightly lit ice palaces themselves are stunning, inside and out, and the sporting facilities have been rightly praised by almost all the athletes. But, beyond them, there is little but concrete expanses, hastily planted grass verges and an incongruous funfair.

To bring the Winter Games to his favourite holiday resort at a cost of $51bn, Vladimir Putin has had to build not only a series of world-class sporting venues but an entire city. The scale of the construction is at once impressive and dizzily disconcerting.

Endless utilitarian apartment blocks and gigantic hotels sprawl seemingly at random in the so-called "coastal cluster". In the mountains, ersatz approximations of a Swiss ski resort have sprouted. Even if you accept the argument that the Games can be used as a catalyst for development, it is impossible not to wonder how they will be filled afterwards.

Lessons have been learned from previous Games, not least London 2012, in how to best frame the sporting action for maximum impact – not only for those watching on television but those attending in person.

At Saturday's snowboarding, staged in a stunning setting under brilliant sunshine to a booming dance music soundtrack and cheering crowds, it was even possible to feel the tingle of excitement in the cool mountain air.

Buried somewhere beneath the barrage of criticism of the huge cost of building the infrastructure to host these Games, the protests about Putin's anti-gay laws and security concerns, is a sporting event struggling to get out. It might even be fun.

Not all of the criticism has been fair and there is a lingering undercurrent of bitterness from the Russian organisers, who believe they are being unfairly targeted.

The Cold War may have been studiously avoided in an intelligent opening ceremony, but the simmering tension between the US and Russia is at the heart of a tug of war over how these Games are presented to the world. American networks in particular have dwelled on tales of unfinished media hotels and ramped-up security concerns.

By the same token, the Russian organisers have been needlessly defensive and slow to acknowledge genuine, and often comical, problems with accommodation and, more seriously, prickly when it comes to criticism of their human rights record and anti-gay laws. Putin's hopes for a flawless Games that would showcase his vision of Russian might to the world is already fraying at the edges.

Rightly or wrongly, it is also the Americans who have been most vocal in their criticism of some of the sparkling new sporting facilities.

Shaun White pulled out of theslopestyle snowboarding over concerns about the safetyof the course and US downhill skier Bode Miller on Saturday warned that the Rosa Khuta piste "could kill you" after watching team-mate Marco Sullivan narrowly escape a serious crash.

Shoddy hotel rooms and malfunctioning giant snowflakes aside, everything else appears to be working as it should. Inside the so-called "ring of steel", security is surprisingly unobtrusive. Policemen are dressed down in purple tracksuits and volunteers are friendly and helpful.

What is not yet clear is where the soul of these Games will lie. Russian organisers insist ticket sales have been strong and venues have appeared fairly full so far. The extent to which ordinary Russians get behind an Olympics that, to date, have sometimes appeared the obsession of just one man will be a key factor in determining how they are remembered.

[Feb 09, 2014] The Darkness Behind Sochi's Sparkle By JULIET MACUR

What I like in NYT is that it became a full service branch of State Department.
Feb 7, 2014 | NYTimes.com

The party that is the Winter Olympics officially began on Friday night inside a new stadium on the shores of the Black Sea.

The Russians brought out their best entertainment: top ballet dancers, dramatic re-enactments of Russian history, an opera singer whose voice was so strong it seemed to shake the Olympic stadium. It was so entrancing, and ran so smoothly, that it was tempting to forget what was behind the pageantry and sparkle.

Thomas Bach, president of the International Olympic Committee, was hoping for that to happen. He said earlier Friday that he was "longing" for the Games to begin. And it's no wonder.

This week Sochi was like a party host whose guests had shown up way too early: just out of the shower, hair in curlers, no makeup, dirty dishes in the sink.

Finishing touches, including some important ones, like bathrooms, were still being applied. Some housing was not ready. Some of it was less funny. One colleague witnessed city workers enticing stray dogs - which are all over this city, though in rapidly decreasing numbers over the past week - with meat, a meal that could very well have been their last.

But all that should not overshadow the bigger issues of these Games, including Russia's oppressive antigay law and its suffocating restrictions on freedom of speech. Those two issues cannot be lost amid the chaos surrounding these Games, and even the competitions about to begin.

It is a certainty that at the same time athletes are celebrated for winning medals, some Russian citizens will be treated far less well - cruelly in fact - for speaking their mind or for being gay. Dmitry Chernyshenko, the head of the Sochi organizing committee, even tried to stifle athletes from speaking their minds about politics in official interview areas in the Olympic Park. But Bach, at his first Olympics as president of the I.O.C., quickly overruled him.

That was not the first time Bach, who is from Germany, took a stand at these Games. He took a bold one on Friday, with the world watching.

At the opening ceremony, during which he sat next to Russia's president, Vladimir V. Putin, Bach gave a strong speech to kick off the Olympics. He made points that sounded like sharp digs at Putin and the law he signed that banned the distribution of so-called gay propaganda to children in Russia.

In the most refreshing speech by an I.O.C. president in decades, Bach did not kowtow to the host country. He said the Olympics should set an example for "human diversity and great unity."

"To the athletes, you have come here with your Olympic dream," he said. "You are welcome, no matter where you come from or your background. Yes, it's possible even as competitors to live together and to live in harmony with tolerance and without any form of discrimination for whatever reason."

Launch media viewer

Russian athletes entering Fisht Olympic Stadium to thunderous applause. Chang W. Lee/The New York Times

He did not have to come out and say it, but many people who heard him knew exactly what he meant.

Recent Comments


Alexander Shumkin
20 hours ago
Thank you. For everybody who had some good words for Russia and can understand the special historic way of our country

Notafan
Yesterday
I watched 10 minutes and turned it off, looking as it did like an overblown 1960s TV variety show. It was a mask, masking despotism, the one...

mihir1310
Yesterday
As an Indian living in the US for a 6 years, I find this constant negative coverage pathetic and disappointing. There is a saying in my part...

See All Comments

Most of the spectators were from Russia, some in parkas with their country's name on the back in Cyrillic letters, others wrapped in the white, blue and red of their nation's flag.

As those people and others filed into the Olympic Park, I could not find a single person wearing Team USA gear. That was not a surprise, since the State Department had issued a travel warning for Americans coming to Sochi because of fears of terrorism. But I did track down four British men in Team GB coats, all of whom had been involved in the London Games two years ago.

"When I came into the airport, the woman who checked me in was miserable, and people don't seem very happy here," said Robin Money, a consultant and former director of sports marketing for Adidas in Britain and Ireland.

"But the opening ceremony is an important trigger. We learned that in London. After this, maybe they'll actually smile."

He was partly right. By the end of the night, some Russians were beaming.

Outside the stadium, as athletes from all nations marched into the opening ceremony, volunteers formed a cordon on either side of them. As each country's delegation passed by, the volunteers cheered. Swe-den! Swe-den! Or Jap-an! Jap-an! And, yes, even U-S-A! U-S-A!

Of course, they cheered loudest for Russia's athletes. As they applauded, a stray dog was sprawled out behind them, chewing on a Sochi 2014 glove someone had dropped.

[Feb 07, 2014] U.S. diplomat plays down leaked call; Germany's Merkel angry

From political point of view neoliberalism vision is close to Communists vision. The only difference is that now the capital of the world is the USA and it is the USA government that controls the rest of the world. Other states are just vassals who implement directions from benevolent "Washington Obcom" and install leaders recommended, or (YouTube)... Funny that it was communists who actually put a major effort in implementing this vision via the dissolution of the USSR.
Feb 07, 2014 | Reuters/Yahoo

... ... ...

Modern Ukraine is divided between eastern provinces that were districts of Russia for centuries and where most people speak Russian, and Western sections that were annexed by the Soviets from Poland and the former Austrian empire, where most people speak Ukrainian and many resent Russian domination.

Although many Ukrainians say they dream of integration with the West, the Soviet economic legacy gives Moscow extraordinary leverage: Ukraine's heavy industry depends on imports of energy, above all Russian natural gas.

Moscow portrays the anti-Yanukovich demonstrators as paid Western agents and seems to be pushing for Yanukovich to order a crackdown to clear the streets.

In some of the sharpest language yet, the Kremlin's point man on Ukraine, Sergei Glazyev, urged the Ukrainian leader to stop negotiating with "putschists". He accused Washington of arming, funding and training the opposition to take power.

Nuland called the remarks "pure fantasy".

"He could be a science fiction writer," she said.

Re-Ran:

When any empire ends under the guise of "renewal" organizations tend to show up, like a parasite they eat the legacy of the empire alive often from within. There are remarkable similarities to most if not all A.D. Empires, From the beginning first pioneers of them up to the final conspicuous consumer populations that eventually become a burden on the state of the empire. They all have 6 stages and in total last around 200-250 years before collapsing. The age of pioneers, the age of conquest, the age of commerce, the age of affluence, the age of intellect, ending with the bread and circus' campaigns of the age of decadence. The age of decadence is amazingly similar throughout most empires. This involves an undisciplined, over extended military, a continuous conspicuous display of wealth, a massive and ever growing disparity between rich and poor, desire to live off a bloated state, and a cultural obsession with sex. More importantly the most similar trend throughout empires in the age of decadence is the aggressive debasement of that empires currency. Once the backing resource of an empires currency is abandoned, the denominations go through a continuous corruption, until even the officials who once backed the people, become more fixated on the accumulation of as much wealth as possible. With this corruption comes distractions.

Like Rome and their Gladiatorial events used to keep the public eye off of state affairs and economy, this is a classic trait of declining empires. Today in the U.S. there is an ever prevalent emphasis on all kinds of television shows, sports, and celebrities. Just like today's celebrities and sports stars earn vast sums of wealth, so did the Roman charioteers, one in the second century gained so much wealth, it would equate to several billions today. And ironically like Rome before it's collapse we even make celebrities out of our chef's. We have been lulled into a lethargy and have completely accepted it. through un fettered consumerism, continuous economic bubbles, and the desire for everlasting youth, the "baby boomer" generation squandered their inheritance from the prior. "and our posterity" became "just for us" and part took in the largest misallocation of capitol in our time, and future generations will pay the price.

richard d

The inmates are not only running the asylum, they own it. Obama and his administration need to be Baker Acted. Welcome to the modern day 'One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest'.

Dosvidanie McFaul!

February 4, 2014

Al says:

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/us-ambassador-russia-stepping-down-124620397.html#Hu7QFHo

..The ambassador announced his departure in a blog post on Tuesday, saying he would leave after the Sochi Winter Olympics..

yalensis says:

February 4, 2014 at 3:24 pm

Пора, мой друг, пора! покоя сердце просит –
Летят за днями дни, и каждый день уносит
Частичку бытия, а мы с тобой вдвоём
Предпологаем жить, и глядь - как раз умрём.
На свете счастья нет, но есть покой и воля.
Давно завидная мечтается мне доля –
Давно, усталый раб, замыслил я побег
В обитель дальную трудов и чистых нег.

(Pushkin, of course)

kirill

After all his chumming and photo-ops with seditionists and terrorist wannabes in Russia he probably lost usefulness. Any kind of interaction with him was likely of the most token variety.

But I don't expect the next US ambassador to be any different.

marknesop

I think his masters must be more than a little disappointed in his complete lack of results.

I mean, he went to Russia as a known democracy fetishist, but he was seasoned enough as a diplomat that he probably expected to not only thoroughly liberalize the Russkies, but to make them like it.

I grew to dislike him less during his tenure rather than more, because he actually seemed like a nice guy and he did relatively unconventional things like appear on Russian talk shows where he had to think on his feet in a foreign language, which he actually spoke fairly well.

But I won't be too sorry to see him go home, and relations are so poor between Russia and the USA now that they could just leave the post vacant for all the difference it would make. I'm sure they won't, and I'm sure the new appointee will be a bright-eyed democratizing regime-changer, too, because the USA doesn't quit. I nominate Kimmie Zigfeld.

Moscow Exile

Nah! There's only one man in the USA that has the political nous to deal with Russia in the capacity of US Ambassador.

Ladies and Gentlemen, let's hear it for Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski!!!

Note Brzezinski's taken out of context "the disintegration of the Soviet Union was greatest calamity of the 20th century" meme so beloved in the West, whereas this is what Putin actually :

"Прежде всего следует признать, что крушение Советского Союза было крупнейшей геополитической катастрофой века. Для российского же народа оно стало настоящей драмой. Десятки миллионов наших сограждан и соотечественников оказались за пределами российской территории. Эпидемия распада к тому же перекинулась на саму Россию.

"Накопления граждан были обесценены, старые идеалы разрушены, многие учреждения распущены или реформировались на скорую руку. Целостность страны оказалась нарушена террористической интервенцией и последовавшей хасавюртовской капитуляцией. Олигархические группировки, обладая неограниченным контролем над информационными потоками, обслуживали исключительно собственные корпоративные интересы. Массовая бедность стала восприниматься как норма. И все это происходило на фоне тяжелейшего экономического спада, нестабильных финансов, паралича социальной сферы.

"Многие тогда думали, многим тогда казалось, что наша молодая демократия является не продолжением российской государственности, а ее окончательным крахом, является затянувшейся агонией советской системы.

"Те, кто так думал – ошиблись. Именно в этот период в России происходили крайне значимые события. В нашем обществе вырабатывалась не только энергия самосохранения, но и воля к новой свободной жизни. В те непростые годы народу России предстояло одновременно отстоять государственный суверенитет и безошибочно выбрать новый вектор в развитии своей тысячелетней истории. Надо было решить труднейшую задачу: как сохранить собственные ценности, не растерять безусловных достижений и подтвердить жизнеспособность российской демократии. Мы должны были найти собственную дорогу к строительству демократического, свободного и справедливого общества и государства".

"Above all, we should acknowledge that the collapse of the Soviet Union was a major geopolitical disaster of the century. As for the Russian nation, it became a genuine drama. Tens of millions of our co-citizens and compatriots found themselves outside Russian territory. Moreover, the epidemic of disintegration infected Russia itself.

"Individual savings were depreciated, and old ideals destroyed. Many institutions were disbanded or reformed carelessly. Terrorist intervention and the Khasavyurt capitulation that followed damaged the country's integrity. Oligarchic groups – possessing absolute control over information channels – served exclusively their own corporate interests. Mass poverty began to be seen as the norm. And all this was happening against the backdrop of a dramatic economic downturn, unstable finances, and the paralysis of the social sphere.

"Many thought or seemed to think at the time that our young democracy was not a continuation of Russian statehood, but its ultimate collapse, the prolonged agony of the Soviet system.

"But they were mistaken.

"That was precisely the period when the significant developments took place in Russia. Our society was generating not only the energy of self-preservation, but also the will for a new and free life. In those difficult years, the people of Russia had to both uphold their state sovereignty and make an unerring choice in selecting a new vector of development in the thousand years of their history. They had to accomplish the most difficult task: how to safeguard their own values, not to squander undeniable achievements, and confirm the viability of Russian democracy. We had to find our own path in order to build a democratic, free and just society and state".

The above is the official Kremlin translation of what Putin said at his Annual Address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on April 25, 2005.

I have added my stress on the indefinite article before "major geopolitical disaster of the century", whereas Brzezinski chooses in his adress to use the definite article "the", notwithstanding that neither definite nor indefinite articles exist in Rudssian – nor do they in Polish for that matter!

Brzezinski then goes on to mention other great calamities of that century – the two World Wars etc. – implying that Putin considers these events as less calamitous than the "disintegration of the Soviet Union" because of the definite article "the", whereas Putin only categorized the collapse of the USSR as "a major geopolitical disaster of the century".

Apparently, Brzezinski still lives in the 20th century: around 1960 or thereabouts, I should imagine.

[Feb 1, 2014] Can Putin Keep Sochi Safe

The American Conservative

The last time the Olympic Games were confronted with a serious, capable, and active terrorist movement was at the 1992 Barcelona Games, when the Euskadi ta Akatasuna (ETA) threatened to stage attacks to highlight its demands for an independent Basque homeland. Currently, the Russian Olympic sponsors of the Sochi Games, which open on February 7th, are confronted by what is quite possibly an even greater threat.

... ... ...

I was the CIA's principal officer in Barcelona for the 1992 Games and also worked with the Chinese National Police in the lead-up to the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Based on those experiences, I would note that the addition of 40,000 soldiers and cops at this point, just two weeks before the Opening Ceremonies, is more cosmetic than effective. They will not know what to do and will be, in a sense, little more than additional targets. Even the estimated total of as many as 100,000 security personnel being in place do not guarantee good results. Olympic security planning, alas, should begin soon after the bid is accepted by the International Olympic Committee and there is no quick fix for it. I spent three years in place in Barcelona doing little beyond working with my Spanish counterparts to plan and eventually implement security arrangements that included physical barriers, intelligence gathering, crowd control, and training of personnel. The Spanish devoted considerable resources to the effort and one of the first permanent facilities set up to support the Games was a fusion center where intelligence could be shared and decisions could be made in real time in response to any perceived threat.

The security for a large scale public event like the Olympic Games is particularly difficult as there must be relatively free access to events combined with protection for visitors and participants. It generally is structured in concentric rings, incrementally increasing the level of scrutiny as one proceeds. The outermost level is static and consists of heavy police and military presence at the fringes of the target area to serve as a deterrent and tripwire for any terrorist attempt. Sochi benefits from being geographically isolated, but it now appears that Putin will also extend the security perimeter outward to include checks on all roads and rail lines entering the region from the mountains behind the city and along the shoreline of the Black Sea. The approaches from the water and the port will be under the control of the Russian Navy and Coast Guard.

Sochi International Airport is modern and has excellent security, with connecting flights from most major Russian cities. One can expect anyone transiting any Russian airport on the way to Sochi to encounter intense scrutiny, so it might be advisable to fly with Austrian Airlines or Turkish Airlines, both of which connect to Sochi. The Russians will also require visas from nearly all foreign visitors, which will be used as a security tool. The screening of arrivals from abroad will be intense, requiring evidence of jobs, income, and other relevant documents.

Once inside the perimeter, there will be two basic levels of security. Sports venues and the Olympic village will have physical and procedural measures in place, including fences, CCTV, and metal detectors as well as security badges linked to access controls. Other public spaces such as hotels, city parks, and squares will have highly visible security in place, but it will be less proactive. One should assume that anyone who appears to be central Asian in origin and any woman wearing Islamic garb will likely be stopped repeatedly, as the Russians are unlikely to be concerned with issues like "profiling."

The United States government has offered to work with the Russians on Sochi but has been politely turned down because the Russians believe, correctly, that they understand their own security environment very well. One can assume that they have been doing NSA-type intensive monitoring of electronic transmissions and phone calls for at least the past year. And the Federal Security Service (FSB) no doubt has a host of informants on tap to provide information on groups operating in or potentially threatening Sochi. In spite of the Russian desire to go it alone, it is nevertheless my understanding that there will be both Russian-speaking CIA and FBI personnel in the Sochi fusion center to provide assistance upon request, together with representatives from a number of European countries. The U.S. Navy will also have ships in international waters in the Black Sea to provide support, or even an evacuation, if called upon.

The principal challenge for Sochi is the relatively new threat posed by the suicide bomber. Since the date for the Games has been known for years, it should be assumed that parts for bombs might have been smuggled into Sochi weeks or even months ago, so the threat might materialize both inside and outside the security perimeter. Suicide bombers who are able to approach a security checkpoint pose a unique threat in that they can create a major incident just by virtue of detonating their explosives even if they only kill themselves, accomplishing their goal of creating uncertainty over the Russian handling of the security of the Games.

... ... ...

Ultimately, fear of terrorism should impel us to behave cautiously, but it is a manageable risk and should not become a reason to avoid doing the things one wants to do.

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.


Thomas O. Meehan , January 28, 2014

What gets lost in some narratives, but not this one, is that THESE ARE THE OLYMPICS! For those of us who revere our western heritage, they are part of our patrimony. Beyond this, the whole civilized world recognizes the high-minded significance of these games. Free men and women should travel to the Olympics wherever they are held, showing solidarity with the spirit of athletic excellence pursued in peace and mutual respect.

Let the barbarians plot.

Fran Macadam, January 28, 2014

It's too bad that cooperation between American and Russian expertise has been undermined by a resurgence of anti-Russian enmity that our own propaganda had us convinced was anti-Soviet and genuinely ideological. In addition, it's credible for the Russians to believe that the voracious American penchant for surveillance would mean that cooperation would be a subterfuge of only secondary interest, with the real interest being intelligence penetration efforts. Overreach is counterproductive, distracting and ultimately wasteful as well.


Hooly says:

If the Chinese can pull off a safe Olympics, then I'm sure the Russians can as well.

Philip Giraldi

John – The State Department says pretty much the same thing in its travel warning for Sochi – suicide bombers will want to inflict maximum casualties so they will go for buses, trains, etc and large groups of people. If you want to be safe, avoid buses & trains and use taxis or walk.

RadicalCenter2016 says:

Philip: Really enjoy your writing and rely on your expertise. But I don't see how someone attending the Olympics can possibly avoid large crowds!

Beijing Expat

> If the Chinese can pull off a safe Olympics, then I'm sure the Russians can as well.

I was living in Beijing already in 2008. And the Olympics were a paranoid, lifeless affair to many locals. I mean: On top of the usual annoyances. "No fun" sums it up best and there was not much of a "welcome" spirit going around. I skipped the whole thing.

> If you want to be safe, avoid buses & trains and use taxis or walk. If you see a crowd gathering go the other way. When entering a venue, wait until there is no or a short line to enter so you are constantly moving. By public spaces I mean avoid areas in squares or parks where people are congregating in groups.

Yep. Sounds like a lot of fun again. Add in graft & greed and my question is:

Why would I bother please?

Andrew:

@Philip Giraldi

Saudis are in any position to instigate any attack using the Chechens.

Saudis do finance "wahabization" of Russia's Muslim minorities. It is documented fact. Hattab was definitely a big shot in Chechnya until he was sent to 72 virgins. The problem here is more in the loss of "agility" by FSB. Today they are "fat cats" of Putin and many themselves are a security risk.

VikingLS says:

Philip any comment on the threat Prince Bandahar is said to have made to Putin re the Olympics?

[Jan 29, 2014] Vladimir Putin tells Brussels to stay out of Ukraine's political crisis by Ian Traynor and Oksana Grytsenko

The full speech is here: http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/6575 . Future historians will be shaking their heads over Western hysteria and hypocrisy one day. As one commenter put it: "Brussels is trying to undermine the Ukraine, aided and abetted by Big Banks, Big Business, Big Pharma, and Big Bureaucrats. The EUSSR wants 'lebensraum' to join in with its Utopianist expansive plans of a new Holy Roman Empire off Semi-autonomous States within the EU." Reminds me the the situation before WWI. Looks like it took 70 years for Western European leaders to forget the lessons of previous war. Europe uber alles is in fashion again. Now correspondents of major Western MSM are used by their bosses as sort of a dead skunk that a feuding neighbor throws into your yard.
28 January 2014 | The Guardian

"The more intermediaries there are, the more problems there are," Putin said. "I am not sure Ukraine needs intermediaries." He pointedly noted that European leaders would complain if Russia sent envoys to mediate in the Greek crisis of the past four years.

... ... ...

Azarov, who has described protesters as "terrorists", had offered his resignation. He said he hoped the move would help achieve a peaceful resolution to the crisis that has gripped the country for more than two months.

"The conflict situation which has come about in the country is threatening the economic and social development of Ukraine, creating a threat to the whole of Ukrainian society and to each citizen," he said.

IGrumble

Absolutely - Brussels is trying to undermine the Ukraine, aided and abetted by Big Banks, Big Business, Big Pharma, and Big Bureaucrats. The EUSSR wants 'lebensraum' to join in with its Utopianist expansive plans of a new Holy Roman Empire off Semi-autonomous States within the EU.

It will all fail in the coming years, just like the Eurozone will.

Klasco

Pretty surprised by the amount of pro-Russia comments in the Guardian. Would thought u guys would all over at RT jerking off to its coverage of 'the terrible rotting West'. EU may have its problems but Russia as an alternative? ..right.

Yes EU and RU are going to meddle in things, Putin saying EU should stay out is like a politician telling his opposite that they should stop playing politics, of course they are both playing politics cos they are both politicians.

The protest going isn't just about the EU and RU anymore its about the dumb way the Ukraine gov played its cards as well.

pillau -> Klasco

Klasco, Russians will stay with Russia. Two thirds of Ukraine are Russians. Therefore, making them part of Europe and asking them to fight the rest of Russia is exceedingly stupid thing to do. By swallowing Ukraine EU will develop severe indigestion that eventually will kill it.

The whole propaganda campaign of the past 20 years, subsidized by EU, was to make Russian Ukranians speak the language of Ukrainian Taliban from the mountains. They do not want to, and elected Yanukovich.

Current 'protests' are a very well organised campaign to intimidate the majority who voted for the government which decided to choose the only path that can save Ukraine from immediate collapse , and that is to take a loan from Russia.

The only path to avert a civil war is to split the country in 2.

EU will not allow this, and thus will assure near permanent instability and misery for Ukraine.

Continent

@sepiae

With £9bn promised to the Ukrainian government and thus having it by the leash Putin has quite some balls spouting such remarks.

With £9bn Putin made just the better offer. In December 2013 the Ukraine was on the brink of bankruptcy and had asked the EU for €20 billion in aid to offset the cost of signing the EU deal The most Brussels has so far offered is €610 million in macro-economic assistance.

http://www.euractiv.com/europes-east/eu-asks-ukraine-clarify-intentio-news-532335

Jeremn

The Telegraph reports this about Ptin in Brussels

""We will abide by our commitments," he said. "The loan and reduction in gas prices are not based on a particular government but desire to help people, in contrast to IMF."

The Russian leader agreed with calls on the Ukraine government not to use force against protesters but also demanded that the EU condemn Ukrainian nationalists taking part in the protests.

"In the west of Ukraine a priest is urging the crowd to go to Kiev and to start storming the government, the Russians and the Jews," he said.

"This is an extreme expression of nationalism it is completely unacceptable in the civilised world."

Why has the Guardian cut this bit out? It sounds a reasonable comment to me.

Jeremn

The actual quote is this;

"For example, a priest in Western Ukraine was calling on the crowd to go to Kiev and topple the Government so as to – using his own words – "prevent negroes, russkies and yids from telling us what to do in our own home". First of all, it is astounding to hear this from a religious figure. Second, this is radical nationalism of a kind that is totally unacceptable in the civilised world. We should call on the Ukrainian Government and President Yanukovych to use civilised methods, but at the same time, we should look at what his political opponents are doing too and call on them to also use civilised methods to fight their political battles."

The full speech is here:

http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/6575

maschine

Putin is very worried obviously, an EU Ukraine is a massive threat to the national security of Russia, if the EU is successful then the US will almost have its missile defense shield over Russia.

Miriam Bergholz

The rise of neo-nazi movements?

I think that it is a good idea to stay away especially after reading an article in "Spiegel" that enlightens a little bit the mess, and make me wonder why the EU is visiting the protesters:

Prepared to Die': The Right Wing's Role in Ukrainian Protests

"With 10 percent support, Svoboda is the fourth-strongest group in parliament. Klitschko and the Tymoshenko party need its backing. Plus, the party is a key player in the protests. But Klitschko plays down Svoboda's right-wing stance. "We have different ideologies, but two things connect us," Klitschko says. "We are fighting against those in power today and we want European values for our country."

Flirting with the Right Wing

The Svoboda party also has excellent ties to Europe, but they are different from the ones that Klischko might prefer. It is allied with France's right-wing Front National and with the Italian neo-fascist group Fiamma Tricolore. But when it comes to the oppression of homosexuality, representative Myroshnychenko is very close to Russian President Vladimir Putin, even if he does all he can to counter Moscow's influence in his country.

Scipio1 -> AnaGram2

Naïve or what! Ukraine is in an awkward geopolitical position insofar as it lies between the American Empire (sorry I mean the US vassal states of the EU) and Russia. As such these outside powers use their local proxies as the local political stalking horses in the drama. Ukraine can either join Oceania (the US/EU) or Eurasia (Russia), it cannot be independent and it will not be allowed to be independent. As is the case in the middle east.

Russia regards the Ukraine as its legitimate sphere of influence, America does not recognise any spheres of influence, other than its own of course, which includes the whole globe. So the Ukraine is up for grabs. Sorry you nationalists, but this is the new global order. Get used to it, the days of independent nation states is over. Rule from Washington/Brussels or Moscow. That is the choice. You are just pawns in the game of global geo-politics.

muskoka

Bravo Putin, you're an international statesman of the highest order.

You saved us from an asinine military confict over Syria.

You've tamed the Iranians and gotten them to listen.

You've exposed the Americans for their moral hypocrisy on the world stage, (and in the New York Times op-ed page too).

And you know what the self-important, unelected, meddlesome bureaucrats in Brussels are in denial about: the European Union is a sinking ship.

Rialbynot -> ubiktd Jon

Geopoliticists in Berlin have always had an obsession about conquering Ukraine, but I never thought they would stoop to so flagrantly exploiting the naivety of an elderly Portuguese ex-Maoist, a Bliarite English plaything, and a has-been Little Russian boxer in order to achieve their Endziel.

HauptmannGurski -> Rialbynot

This ex-Berliner can tell you that Berlin is not about conquering - any more. There are some people who are capable of learning. Admittedly it was made easy by the results, the ruins amongst which I grew up. Photos of the time are still prominently displayed and update the learning process to current generations.

And besides, nobody can say that in public but knowing my former countrymen and women they'd say behind closed doors "Who'd want these people in the tent? Every time they don't like something they throw a tantrum? And then they come to us for money to build it up again? No thanks." There's a German term 'wes Geistes Kind' which doesn't translate terribly well, but means they're displaying a mentality and attitude that leaves a lot to be desired.

ChukTatum

Putin's clearly getting very nervous with the Sochi olympics, the protests in Kiev, and all the fuss generated about gay and other human rights in Russia. This is the moment for the EU and the US to forget their differences about the spying and join in to stick it to Putin and his thug regime. This could become his Ceaucescu moment, spreading out from Kiev, where the Ukraine puppet regime is wobbling and in the process of capitualting, onto Moscow and St Petersburg. As McCain said, your time is up Vlad!

The upcoming NATO security conference in Munich would be the perfect opportunity to put on a very ostentatious and public display of western democratic unity and harmony and for the old democratic allies EU+US to bury the hatchet and their differences and declare moral war on Putin's fascist gangster

state.

HelloLenin -> ChukTatum

Oh the smell of Russophobia in the morning!

HelloLenin -> ChukTatum

I'm well aware that the RF is capitalist.

But Russia is anti-imperialist, I will stand with them and multipolarity against the west.

200gnomes -> ChukTatum

There are no differences on the NSA spying only full cooperation from our european leaders. Putin is democratically elected, and the USA hmm, fascism being the merger between corporate interest and state check, gangster check and what moral highground exactly? Guantanomo bay or illegal warfare, highjacking the world with a war on drugs, 1% of its citizens incarcerated, higher income difference than Brazil. On what moral ground do you mean exactly, my little angel?

maureenincork

Catherine Ashton? Never stood for election in her life but, nevertheless, she's on the top EU echelon now. It's who you know, not what you know in this European Project, you serfs and villeins. This woman is titled, don't you know, and should be addressed as Baroness Upminster although Putin might not care for this high-falutin' stuff.

putinhero -> maureenincork

Her husband runs Yougov. Think of that next time you read some opinion polls.

richardofbirmingham

Most of us probably hope for harmonious and close relations with the Ukraine ( and Russia ), and, in the Ukraine's case even at some future point an association with the eu once the British have managed to get it to reform so as to row back from the super state fixation.

However who authorised the eu's Brussels representative to meddle; did the UK. How does it correspond with our interests.

This has some similarities with how the First World War started. Its also worth remembering that expansion ' to the east ' was a principal driver for the Second World War in which this part of the world was a major element.

AnaGram2 -> richardofbirmingham

Excuse me, but are you asking the right questions here? Just who has authorised PUTIN to meddle? Putin is the one who's brought us to this juncture. He just had to go and meddle, and in a really big way, in Ukrainian affairs at the time Ukraine was negotiating with the EU. Quite understandably, people were enraged. Whether Russian or Ukrainian by nationality, most people in Ukraine prefer a closer association with the far less corrupt European Union than with corrupt Russia and its horrid little dictator (and whoever wants to argue about that should go and check their facts first). Now, by "warning" off a European mediator, Putin is trying to act like he has some kind of authority over Ukraine.

TheRussianGirl -> AnaGram2

You think only from one perspective. Try look at this from a different angle. Of course Putin is not saint and any person can get enraged by his action. But why shouldn't he think about Russia in this case. Sorry to tell you but most production in Ukraine won't sant european standards and all their goods will be sold where? To its nearest neighbors? To us? I mean Russia. Not everything but a big part of it will go to our country. Do we need it? Well, not really, because we have our own production and our own economy. Was it a blackmail? You can think whatever you want. He probably should not have said that just to see how Ukrainian economy would collapse. But he said a lot of thing because he is all those things you like to name him. Your rage won't do him any harm.

putinhero

Putin is completely anti-gay.

First of all he has stopped Western interference in Syria. That was totally anti-gay.

Then he has restored the Orthodox Church in Russia, after 80 years of Churches being forcefully destroyed by Communists. That was totally anti-gay.

Then Putin has worked for peace with other nations. Totally anti-gay.

But Putin defends Russian interests. Totally anti-gay.

Also now we have British, French, Americans all attacking Ukraine and causing riots. They hope to make a civil war that will then affect Russia. That will only cause a repeat of the Russian revolution in Russia today. That is all the worst traits of Bolshevism brought back to today. Totally gay.

detroitobama

These are the actual quotes from Putin:

The more intermediaries there are, the more problems there are. I am not sure Ukraine needs intermediaries. I can only imagine what the reaction would be if in the heat of the crisis in Greece or Cyprus, our foreign minister came to an anti-European rally and began urging people to do something. This would not be good. I'm sure the Ukrainian people will sort this out and Russia is not going to interfere.

The headline makes it sound like Putin is going to start a war with EU over this issue. But his quotes reflect common sense and refute the idea that the headline is trying to convey.

OneTop

The delusional and very dangerous EU should stay in Brussels. Are they not satisfied with destroying the EMU member nations or do they really want to do in the Ukraine as well?

AuntieSmurf

Hang on a minute. Wasn't some Euro apparatchik on here only yesterday telling us all how the EU had kept the peace for 60 years? And now they're trying to start a war with Russia!

HelloLenin

When it's Egypt, the leadership is a "military government." When it's Ukraine or Syria, it's a "regime."

It's not rocket science.

For the western imps, the integration of Ukraine into their orbit means:

* expansion of Western business opportunities
* growing isolation of Russia, one of the few countries strong enough to challenge amerikkkan hegemony.
* influence over transit of Russian gas exports to Europe
* military strategic advantage.

putinhero -> HelloLenin

Not only that. It is the end of nation states in the world. There is no conspiracy. The world is changing to a world without borders. No more nation states. It will be a brutal hell on earth.

sitarlun

Europe is making a huge mistake by inciting revolt in Ukraine. the Russian's under Putin's leadership will not tolerate such intrusion into to their neighborhood. The western alliance tried it before in Georgia and the Russians crushed that country.

Also most of those involved in this revolt are from Galicia and during the ww2 these ultra right wingers collaborated with the Nazis by fighting a guerilla warfare against the red army.

detroitobama -> whitehawk66

The west would definitely like to see Putin go. They would prefer Russia being ruled by a traitor like Gorbachev or Yeltsin. Putin is a strong leader who wouldn't bend over for the western elites who want to control Russia in their quest for global domination. When the west says Russia should be more democratic what it means is that the country should allow the west to loot them more (by sending economic hitmen for example).

The fact is Russia has improved a lot since Putin became their leader. The nation is at it's best since the nightmare of communism and Yeltsin's rule ended.

Lifesaparty

The president of the European council, Herman Van Rompuy, insisted Lady Ashton would seek to reconcile the two sides in Kiev on the basis of "democratic rules" and aim to prevent an escalation of violence.

What could possibly go wrong with that?

catveryverybigone2 -> Lifesaparty

What could possibly go wrong with that?

=======

wrong is that she is a side in the conflict....a mediator should be unbiased - for example some Philipino diplomat or Brazilian diplomat etc - a side of a conflict can't be a mediator of this conflict...

MartynInEurope

I would guess that quite a few people would not be happy about the Russian Federation meddling in the relationship between the UK and Ireland, never mind between England and Scotland.

On this issue, Putin is bang on the money.

Lifesaparty -> MartynInEurope

And he makes Ashton and v Rompuy to look like the idle meddling busy bodies that they are.

MartynInEurope -> Lifesaparty

That too, although we've know it for quite a while now, especially in Pants case.

RedMangos

Victoria Nuland has been seen handing out cakes to 'protesters' in Keiv

Imagine that senior figure form a foreign country acting this way.

Think about it, what would London say if Hu Jintao turned up in Berwick-upon-Tweed agitating for Scottish secessionism.

It will be unacceptable and rightly so.

London will be rightly furious.

Nuland needs to go back to her own country and make sure Americans have getting enough to eat and an education.

Babeouf

Putin isn't getting nervous he's staying consistent. His message over Libya was that Western interference would prove a disaster for the Libyans. His message about Ukraine is the same. Already people in the Crimea are forming self defense youth groups led by ex army officers. These are to provide support for its succession should the 'Western Coup' prove successful. The triumph of the opposition will mark the end of Ukraine's integrity. As happened in Georgia part of Ukraine will unite with Russia. And certainly Putin has plans for just this outcome Why would he be nervous unless the German army is to march East.

Vaska Tumir

Putin expressly and publicly tell the EU that he sees no conflict between Ukraine's economic co-operation with both EU and the Euro-Asian trading bloc Russia's building up -- and both the Western press and the Russophobes who post here claim that Russia is trying to force Ukraine into something.

Future historians will be shaking their heads over Western hysteria and hypocrisy one day.

zelazny

This comes down to whether western financial capitalists will control the Ukraine or the Russians. The Russians will win in the long run. Financial capitalism hasn't long to live in this world.

Rich Ukrainians want to ally themselves with Europe and screw the poor in their country. Things don't change. It works like that in every capitalist country, where the rich have the most, followed by their middle class supporters, and the rest or the majority have little or nothing.

itsmerob

Vlad knows that the Ukrainian issue is a geopolitical issue. This is about isolating Russia, with the unelected EU bureaucrats and US playing a dangerous game of provoking Russia in ways that they themselves would find unacceptable if the roles were reversed. Russia was investing in the Ukraine, its infrastructure and for the benefit of the Ukrainian people, albeit for their own benefit, which includes stopping NATO's drive to the east. The EU/US do what they always do, give money to the country's elites to get there way. It's the Neoliberal way, a rich corrupt elite and a disenfranchised population. The Ukraine inside the EU would be disastrous for them. Do they really want to be another Greece, Ireland, Portugal? Asset stripped and tied into debt slavery. The Ukraine would also be expected to host US missiles aimed at Moscow, thus making themselves a target for the Russians. Say what you like about Putin, but hes not stupid and isn't easily pushed around.

VoiceFromNowhere

I wonder why the authors of this article have written these words:

Yanukovych's biggest concession to the opposition, … a promise to repeal draconian laws criminalising protest and freedom of speech.

It's common knowledge these Ukrainian laws are much more lenient than the corresponding European ones. So my question is "Is it an indirect and somewhat veiled way to criticizing the relevant European laws, for example the French ones?"

Kaikoura

The real mystery is why the EU is remotely interested in having Ukraine as a club member.

Aretoussa -> Kaikoura

Cheap labour for VW's next factory abroad surely. Export market for Mercedes' cars. Opportunity for Siemens to build more power plants. It is all about benefitting Germany's economy. But Russia is too big a fish, even for Ms Merkel. Besides, Germany heavily relies on gas imports from Russia, and Russia is an important export market for German goods. So after Brussels makes a bit of fuss, they will back off.

Aretoussa

Is Europe/Brussels the good knight on a white horse?! I don t think so. Germany's big companies surely want access to the Ukraine as the next big market for their cars and machines.

And Putin has a very valid point! When Russia offered to co operate with Brussels, to help finance the rescue of the Greek and Cypriot economy, Germany said no, because Ms Merkel and Mr Schaeuble don t want Russia in their back garden. Well then, stay out of Russia's back garden now.

VoiceFromNowhere

Azarov, who has described protesters as "terrorists", …

I've always said the former Prime Minister, Azarov, was the only adequate and gutsy man among them. He's not afraid of calling a spade a spade and terrorists terrorists.

There's also that bold woman, Elena Lukash, the Minister of Justice. If I were Ukrainian and she ran for President I'd probably vote for her. She would immediately send spetsnaz to beat all the opposition shit out of them...

steavey

The weakness of the EU's position with Ukraine is having unelected leaders in Van Rompuy, president of the European council and the EU commission president, Jose Manuel Barroso and Baroness Catherine Ashton, the EU foreign policy chief discussing Ukraine with elected presidents of both Ukraine and Russia.

That puts both presidents of Ukraine and Russia in a much stronger position because they have a legitimate mandate because they were elected. And nit was not too long ago, democratically elected western leaders were always preaching to the Russian dominated USSR with the Ukraine as a former member about the need to be democratically elected - how times have changed.

ReachFreedom

Yeah, Putin, this is your reward for stopping airstrikes in Syria...now we'll get to work in your own back yard. Which tool should we use today? Well, let's use the EU.

jb10001 -> ReachFreedom

And we'll bad-talk the Olympics and scare everyone away....make sure it's a flop; the price to pay for harboring Snowden!!!

AndyAjna

Why do people assume the EU and EC are the angels here? They have destroyed the sovereignty of nations and wealth of their own citizens using unelected insiders. Ireland booted them out and is now growing. Ditto Iceland. The long-term game plan has always been to take control away from citizens and give their money to the banks. Russia, along with China, Brazil, India, has been standing up to this western neocon elite. While his anti-gay stance is a huge worry, I don't assume the EU isn't a snake in the grass either. Classic financial war going on. With western gold holdings nearly zero now, BRICS are leading the way to stabilize the global currencies with assets via gold-backed SDRs. Western bankers are trying to retain control. This is the back story.

HauptmannGurski

This is really tragic because the Ukrainians do not seem to understand that they'll lose a lot of their hard won sovereignty in the EU, first to Brussels and then to the trans-Atlantic trade pact which enables companies to take governments to court if they do not produce compliant legislation. Rather than pay billions in compensation for 'wrong' legislation, they'd enact what the companies want. They might as well forget about the idea of a parliament when the investment protection court in Washington tells them what laws they can have and which not. (See Swedish firm Vattenfall against the German government, challenging valid legislation).

Surely Ukrainians cannot be so ignorant as not to know what trap the EU is? The secret trans-Atlantic trade pact negotiations are only set aside for three months, not cancelled. And to top it all off, this is set up as a one way street. If any country would want to exit that trade pact if it doesn't deliver, each and every EU country would have to agree; so in practice nobody can leave.

Ciarán Here

This article is extremely pointed and does not reflect what was said in a balanced way. Other news media across the globe gives a more balanced view of what putin actually said. The  headline on this article is farcical even if putin believed what this bias article highlights the man putin is not dumb and would not say it as it written in this article. Jealousy, envy and English patristic sentiment are on show in this article. Putin envy

worldtraveler01

Guardian is reporting a false statement (completely opposite to what Putin said at the press conference).

At the press conference and Putin said "we will maintain 15 billion agreement with Ukraine regardless of the political party hat will come to power"

Guardian: "We would most likely fail to maintain the preferential agreements with Ukraine if it signs the [EU] association agreement," he said.

SingDave -> worldtraveler01

That's two different points;

1: He will maintain the funds regardless of which Party takes power.

2: He will withdraw funds if that Party signs an EU association agreement.

The Guardian were correct in their reporting.

worldtraveler01 -> SingDave

While these points appear to be different, they are closely related. Reporting only half of truth and ignoring the inconvenient half is not good journalism practice.

Socialist4ever

When are the US and its followers in Europe going to finally stay out of other people's business? Russia has no recent history of invading other countries- maybe those that have should mind their own business.

AuntieSmurf -> Socialist4ever

Nice attempt to switch the blame to every Guardianistas favourite bogeyman. But this isn't about the US, it's about that flabby wannabee superpower, the EU.

slorter

Would America tolerate this type of interference if it was happening in Mexico?

vFUZZYv same

You see the classic propaganda offered by Brussels. Their public relations is brilliant. They create a problem and then they come in with flying colours with an answer only helpful for their selfish desires. Who is to blame Putin for protecting a country once part of the Soviet Union?

The political elite feed off minor nations and Britain America along with several European Union countries plot only for their selfish desires.

khoechsmann

What lies was I fed in school? Was Kiev ever the capital of Russia? Did Muscovites not found a new centre up north, less vulnerable to Mongol invaders, and take the name of "Russia" with them, leaving behind their home territory as a "march"?

If this were true, it would be no wonder that Moscow keeps meddling in the affairs of Kiev. But did not the deal cut by Messrs. Molotov and Ribbentrop bloat that march by a fair chunk of fiercely Roman Catholic Poland? If that were also true, who can be surprised at ethnic, linguistic, and religious tensions?

marco00018

I spoke with my friends from Ukraine last night,everyone knows that the EU and US are making trouble. One of my friends is a University student, he told me that he and his friends were offered money to go to demonstrations. Where is this money coming from?

There is nothing that president Yanukovych can do to stop the demonstrations unless he agrees to the EU.

It is interesting that the EU and US are trying to overthrow a president that was elected freely, so much for democracy.

InfoOps -> marco00018

Thats it your right.

There is nothing that president Yanukovych can do to stop the demonstrations unless he agrees to the EU.

Once poor Yanukovych signs the EU agreement Those fools that are the protestors will go home wherever they came from and i doubt these protestors are Ukrainians to begin with.

The only thing that Yanukovych can do is to cut off all the US based NGOs in Ukraine and watch McCain go nuts.

mygirl

Here we go again. Ukraine has at least three groups within its populace

... ... ...

Luuukke

I'm not European but one thing I know for sure this man Van Rompuy is a dangerous man and I hear that he's not even elected yet wants to mediate in a democratic process in Ukraine....Can't you people in the EU see what's wrong with this picture ?? Do not be sheeple....It began the same way in the 1930's and the rest is history.....Live and learn...

grumpyben

Interesting notion, for those who trumpet that the EU has kept us from a war that was never going to happen; German/Russian rivalry re asserting itself again.

Forth come the shades of SS Division Nordland, Wiking, Charlemagne...

VladimirM

I think that those in Europe who support this "rioting for the sake of democracy" should be more conscious. Because its a clear sign given to all radicals and anarchists in their countries that it works.

ASLEFshrugged

I can only imagine what the reaction would be if in the heat of the crisis in Greece or Cyprus, our foreign minister came to an anti-European rally and began urging people to do something

The question in Ukraine is whether to join the EU so it's understandable that the EU should send someone along. In Vlad's example the question in Greece would be whether to leave the EU not whether they become part of Russia so why would Russian envoys be relevant?

Also Ashton is going in an attempt to mediate between the two sides, not speak at an anti-Russian/pro-EU rally.

Ukraine might have a long, long wait before it gets full EU membership, just look how long its taken Turkey, 1987 and still not part of the club......

edwardrice -> ASLEFshrugged

The question in Ukraine is whether to join the EU. Ukraine isn't joining the EU. Membership isn't being offered. There is a EU/Ukraine trade agreement attached to economic 'reforms' on the table.

ASLEFshrugged -> edwardrice

Thank you for the correction, amend my previous comment to "the question is whether to enter into a trade agreement with the EU". Gosh, really, all this fuss over a trade agreement?

terziev

Not only civilians were killed!!! Why there is no mention of the dead policemen and the scores that are seriously injured? Guardian, please do not join the wicked chorus. Remember why you're respected news source http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/nov/26/ukraine.comment

[Jan 29, 2014] Winter Olympics 2014 Welcome to Sochi – a city where 'there are no gay people' by John Sweeney

BBC provocateurs in Sochi. I think the guy has a right last name ;-)
As Papasha Muller quipped about other sob : "Креатиииивный класс, бл... Уникальный журналистский коллектиф."
January 26, 2014 | The Independent

It's when you try to hear stories at first hand that the gloss comes off the Olympic varnish. We rolled up to a checkpoint in the middle of the village of Akhshtyr, which is east of Sochi. It's a nowhere kind of place, not special, but it didn't used to be quite as ugly as it is now. High up is a massive quarry, where rock for the Olympics has been hewed, and now the big hole in the ground is to be a landfill dump. Lorries thundered through the checkpoint all day, engines roaring as they inched past our car, but we couldn't move.

The soldiers were FSB and the lead grunt barked at me in Russian that we could not pass. But to do our job, we had to. An Olympic road and rail link joining the opening venue on the coast with the brand new mountain resort cost £5bn, causing critics to say it would have been cheaper to have paved it with Louis Vuitton handbags. The villagers say the link has cut off the village from Sochi. A promised access road has not been built, so that everyone, including schoolchildren, has to drive an extra hour down a muddy track.

I looked the FSB grunt in the eye and : "President Putin promised the IOC that journalists would be welcome in Sochi." My colleague Nick Sturdee translated and a look of unease clouded the FSB grunt's face: he was young, blond and had a big gun. But nor did he want to fall out with some stranger who quoted the President.

He took our passports and questioned our status: "How we do know you are journalists?" We didn't have Russian press passes because, although we had sent in applications three weeks before, the Foreign Ministry in Moscow was unable to print our photographs, or communicate that difficulty to us.

I phoned the IOC to complain that the FSB had taken our passports. An official phoned back to scold us for going to Akhshtyr without Russian press passes.

The FSB kept our passports but allowed us to walk on foot through their checkpoint to film the villagers. They complained about the quarry, owned by Russian Railways, the boss of which, Vladimir Yakunin, is reportedly a friend of Mr Putin. Later, the mayor said that the village's problems would be addressed after the Olympics.

Moscow Exile says:

From a story in today's Independent on the upcoming Sochi Olympics that there really, really are homosexuals in Sochi, despite that city's mayor denying their presence there. (Clearly, the mayor does not read Die Zeit): Winter Olympics 2014: Welcome to Sochi – a city where 'there are no gay people'

The report is written by one of the BBC's Panorama team, who promptly set out trying to remove "the gloss" from the "Olympic varnish" and unearth evidence about the Evil Regime's dastardly deeds in the Olympic city and its environs.

In doing this, the doughty BBC journalists blunder into an FSB manned security check point:

"The soldiers were FSB and the lead grunt barked at me in Russian that we could not pass. But to do our job, we had to."

Oh noble, noble BBC journalists!

Note the term "barked". As it turns out in the story, the BBC smart-arse reporter can't speak Russian: for all he knew, the FSB man might have said to hi e!"

"An Olympic road and rail link joining the opening venue on the coast with the brand new mountain resort cost £5bn, causing critics to say it would have been cheaper to have paved it with Louis Vuitton handbags."

It's favourite meme time again! Slightly modified, though,I must admit. I only heard the "paved with black caviar" line before.

"The villagers say the link has cut off the village from Sochi. A promised access road has not been built, so that everyone, including schoolchildren, has to drive an extra hour down a muddy track."

Those evil swine in Moscow!

Have no fear, though. Our doughty man in Sochi faces up to what Hugh Laurie would, no doubt, describe as a "slab-faced goon":

"I looked the FSB grunt in the eye and : 'President Putin promised the IOC that journalists would be welcome in Sochi'. My colleague Nick Sturdee translated and a look of unease clouded the FSB grunt's face: he was young, blond and had a big gun. But nor did he want to fall out with some stranger who quoted the President."

Get the message? Mere mention of the poison dwarf's name makes the "grunt" quake with fear.

That's how it is in the Evil Empire.

The BBC hero then reports that the grunt asks: "How do we know you are journalists?" which question turns out to be surprisingly logical, considering that the "grunt" is clearly a brain-dead mutant, because on our hero's own admission: "We didn't have Russian press passes…"

Well blow me down! No press passes! So in an area where terrorism is a very real threat, this beast from the FSB queries their identities. How very obstructive of him!

Of course, their not having press passes, says the BBC man, is all the fault of the Russians. However, press passes or no, our stalwart heroes must seek and find a story, and so with much derring-do, they fearlessly head into the Land of the Orcs.

I recall Tin-Tin doing the same in a North Caucasus war zone a few years back. He got quite irate, it seems, when they fucked him off because he had no suitable documents and in his Grauniad story about the incident he described how he angrily asked his tormentors if they knew he was a British journalist and whether they realized the trouble that would ensue if he was not allowed to follow his noble call of reporting the facts and nothing but.

They still told him to take a hike back to Moscow, though.

Brutes!

marknesop says:

"Slightly modified, though, I must admit. I only heard the "paved with black caviar" line before."

Nope, the Louis Vuitton thing was Ioffe, too. In fact, caviar is the one that was not in her original story, although it came up in discussion later; I think it might have been Anatoly who originally referred to it (sarcastically) as "Caviar Road".

[Jan 29, 2014] Just an observation about Western MSM

Correspondents of major Western MSM accredited in Russia are now used by their bosses as sort of a dead skunk that a feuding neighbor throws into your yard.

[Jan 26, 2014] Stephen Cohen The Unfolding Ukrainian Political Crisis

See also EuroMaidan
The Nation

In this wide-ranging interview, John Batchelor speaks with NYU Professor of Russian History Stephen F. Cohen about the violent turn of Kiev's street protests and terrorist threats at the Sochi Olympics. According to Cohen, US officials maintain an overly simplified view of the Ukraine protests, failing to differentiate between the pro-EU and ultranationalist factions, and their interference is exacerbating tensions between Russia and the United States.

Cohen said, "As this Western/Russian standoff grows into a full-scale confrontation, it spills over and spoils the opportunities for cooperation in Syria, on Iran and at the Sochi Olympics."

For more on the unfolding situation in Kiev, listen to Cohen's interview on KPFA 94.1's Letters and Politics.

-Allegra Kirkland

theshadowknows

Stephen, have you noticed the similarities between what is happening today in the Ukraine and what happened in the run up to the war against Qaddafi in Libya and the ongoing war against Assad in Syria? One of the common links is the willingness of the U.S. government under Obama to recognize so-called "opposition forces" as the legitimate governments of those countries prior to their assuming power with the help of the U.S.

This is being repeated in the Ukraine, where the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and its allied operatives of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the George Soros Open Society Institute are backing the themed, astro-turf protests of the pro-EU Blue Buckets organized by the CIA and Britain's MI6

[Jan 19, 2014] Sochi Olympics Vladimir Putin's interview with world media in full

January 19, 2014 | RT Russian politics

Transcript of the interview of Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation, to Channel One, Rossiya-1, ABC News, BBC, CCTV television channels and Around the Rings agency.

[The text of the interview comes as published at http://kremlin.ru]

Vladimir Putin: I believe that you know everything about the coming Olympics and I am wondering what else I can tell you. Or, maybe, you do believe that you know everything so I could hardly make you change your mind. But a chance still exists and I am taking this opportunity to talk to you with great pleasure.

Ed Hula: I have been traveling to this city for eight years and I am witnessing sweeping changes here – a whole new cluster has been constructed in the mountains with sports arenas, stadiums, various trails, including a biathlon range. A great deal of money has been put into Sochi to host the Olympic Games; according to the estimate, 50 billion dollars. But we have not had a chance to know the exact amount yet and to understand how much the Olympics cost. Well, how much are they? And are they worth that money? What benefits will these Games bring?

Vladimir Putin: The overall cost of the Olympics has been announced; it is 214 billion rubles. You can calculate the dollar amount dividing this figure by 33 which is a current exchange rate.

But that is not what I want to tell you here. I want to begin with what we scheduled to do before the Olympics in 2006/07 when we adopted the Sochi Development Master Plan. Looking at the map of the Russian Federation, one can see a country covering mostly northern areas; today more than 70 percent of our territory is or can be referred to as northern, if not the Far North. We have a rather small warm Black sea strip in the South and – to tell the truth – quite a few regions with a hospitable warm climate. And so far we have had no contemporary resorts the Russian people could enjoy throughout that huge area. Today we are at the top of the list of those traveling on holiday abroad. As far as I know, Russians are the first among tourists going to Turkey; last year three million Russians visited that country, although its climate zone is almost the same as the one of the Black sea region. Therefore, we have had an important task to develop an infrastructure in this region of the Russian Federation. And again, to this end we have adopted a special program. But as usual there is not enough money to deal with what seems to be of the first importance; however, it is true both for Russia and any other country in the world. And when it comes to the resort development activity which is never seen as a priority, there is never enough money. Therefore, in fact our goal was to address a few tasks at one time.

An aerial view from a helicopter shows hotels and residential houses recently constructed for the 2014 Winter Olympics in the Adler district of the Black Sea resort city of Sochi, December 23, 2013. (Reuters / Maxim Shemetov)

The first and the most important one was to develop the South of the country, and primarily its infrastructure. And – to my mind – we have made real progress here since a completely new transport, energy and environment infrastructure has been set up. In terms of current emissions into atmosphere and those of 2007, today when the project is nearly over the amount of air pollutants is half its 2007 amount. We have achieved that result due to the use of a more eco-friendly fuel in electric power sector, two new gas pipelines and eight or nine electrical substations, as well as a cleanup of two constantly fuming dumps in the area of greater Sochi and a new transport infrastructure. All those measures helped to ease the environmental burden. Let's admit that it is crucial for a resort.

The second task we were focused on was to re-establish training bases for high-ranking athletes. After the collapse of the Soviet Union Russia lost nearly all its training facilities in middle-altitude mountains. All of them are not ours anymore; they are either Georgian or Armenian, or Kazakhstani, I mean the Medeu skating rink. It is shameful and embarrassing but our ice skating professionals had to hold the Russian national championship in Berlin due to the lack of appropriate skating rinks. Then, we also lost all facilities related to ski jumping. Today we have built a few centers, some of them beyond Sochi. But two new Sochi ski jumps are totally unique in a technical sense; for the purposes of Olympic training we have also constructed the most sophisticated ski jumps in some other regions.

Finally, the third task was to create a new mountain cluster in order to transform this part of the Russian Federation into a resort which can be used in any season, in winter and in summer. I think that we have accomplished this task as well. Therefore, if we consider only the preparations for the Olympics, they cost 214 billion, as just 15 sport facilities have been built, while most of the money was spent on infrastructure. If we take into account some expenses associated with the development of relevant infrastructure, the sum may be larger, but those expenses are not directly related to the Olympic Games.

Sergey Brilev: Vladimir Vladimirovich, you have just called the ski jump a unique facility. But it is unique not only from the sports and technical point of view. The foreigners are very unlikely to know about the question: Where is Mr. Bilalov? Your visit to the jumping facility and request to get explanation of how various parts of the mechanism function. Mr. Bilalov was severely punished in front of the entire nation. Did it frighten the others so as to push them to fulfill their promises? And in general how do you feel about it?

Vladimir Putin: First, let me finish the answer to Ed's question. Public investments make up 100 out of 214 billion, the rest is provided by private companies. This money is primarily put in hotel infrastructure. By the way, we have built more than 40,000 (between 41,000-43,000, as far as I know) brand new hotel rooms, which is a crucial component of resort development. That is where private investments of our companies have been allocated.

As for the missed deadlines, well, we both understand that over the past several years the Sochi Olympic project has been the largest construction site in the world. Without exaggeration, the biggest building site on the planet. And it is only natural that some problems would come up given the scale of the project and, frankly, lack of experience of such large-scale construction projects in our country, in modern Russia. Certainly, we had to enter into unpleasant discussions on prices, deadlines and quality of work. It could not be otherwise. Absolutely impossible! Constant praise would have brought us nowhere. My job is not only to give medals, you know, which certainly is part of my function. First and foremost, though, my job is about ensuring success of the work in various spheres. It is a kind of day-to-day spadework. In which part of the world have you ever seen builders who meet all the deadlines and provide high-quality work at the lowest price? Just give me at least one country. Not a single country in the entire world. We see the attempts to overvalue facility prices everywhere – in Europe, North America, Asia. Same story everywhere.

However, this struggle between the customer (in this case, it is either the state or the private sector that has build hotels here) and the executing agency, the contractor, is quite common. Contractors always pursue large profit, the customer – a high-quality end product in due time and at a lower cost. This struggle never ends, but this is natural. Obviously, there is the limit beyond which the struggle is criminalized, but it is under the mandate of the law enforcement bodies to control that, and they have shown tough and good work here. We have tried to prevent anyone from crossing this limit. All in all, I think we have managed it.

As for this specific case, yes, the Russian Sberbank has taken up this project and accomplished it providing excellent quality and modern solutions. There are no other jumping facilities like that in the world.

George Stephanopoulos: It was said that the issue of corruption is really serious: 18 billion dollars were plundered, the Swiss said, is it true or not?

Vladimir Putin: First, the Swiss did not say that. Of course, we are not uninterested in what our partners say in the world, especially, in the Olympic movement. I have seen the verbatim report of his meeting with some journalists, your colleagues tried to drag him to this topic, and I understand journalists, it is their work – always drag out "hot" topics. But the Swiss specialist, the President, as I understand, of the International Ski Federation, he did not say that, as it seemed to me in the report, this is the first.

Second, if anyone has concrete data on instances of corruption related to the implementation of the Sochi Olympics Project, we ask to furnish us with objective data. We will be glad and grateful and we will use this information to put things right in this sphere.

What are instances of corruption? In this case they mean theft of public funds with the help of state officials, in whose hands these funds fall. If anyone has such information, give these findings to us, please. I repeat once again, we will be grateful. But besides talk, no one furnishes us with anything. We understand and know and are even used to it, there are always some forces which are always against everything, even the Olympics project. I do not know why, but, probably, it is their job, probably they are inclined to it, somebody offended them in their life. But if there is objective data, give it to us, please, as soon as possible. For the moment we do not have it, nobody gives it. Our law-enforcement bodies work on this issue. There were cases, I have already talked about it, some years ago local officials tried to trade land designated for Olympics venues. An investigation was conducted; people were convicted by the Russian court and are serving the sentence. We have not seen any big, large-scale instances of corruption in the framework of the Sochi Project implementation. There are things I have already talked about, there are attempts of executives, contractors to drive up the price. But this, I repeat, is going on in all countries of the world, and our task is to decrease it and achieve good quality of the project and compliance with the deadlines of construction. Combat always goes on, you understand, we always speak about it in public, and always in this regard even fuel rumors about corruption. What should we do? Either always keep silent about it, or not to be afraid of such reaction and work openly. We chose the second way. If we see that there are some problems anywhere, we speak about it in public.

Well, that is my comment on this issue. I do not see serious corruption for the moment, but the question related to the overstatement of the construction volume exists. You know, I can give another comment on that. What are the reasons of construction overstatement?During tenders and competitions bidders for this or that project often lower the cost of the project on purpose, in order to win the project. As soon as they win, they understand that they cannot manage with these prices and start to increase them. It happens almost everywhere as well. Our case is not unique. In this regard we can speak about the level of holding tenders, probably. But this price increase, it is sometimes connected with deliberate acts of contractors, and sometimes with the lack of efficient professional estimates of necessary investments, especially in mountain conditions, in conditions of a mountain cluster.

The Caucasus Mountains are young mountains, and there are a lot of problems related to seismic activity, a lot of problems with landslides, etc. All these things sometimes have not been estimated expertly and promptly at the initial project price evaluation. There are such moments, but this is not corruption.

Andrew Marr: Mr. President, now the British people are thinking of going to France or Switzerland to ski, and you want to persuade them to go to Russia to ski. If they go, how difficult it would be to get visa? Unilaterally, can you without any agreement with the European Union, without negotiations with the EU, undertake steps to relax the visa regime, simplify visa receiving and entry?

Vladimir Putin: As far as the Sochi Olympiad guests are concerned we took a unique decision and its unique character is in the situation that the Olympiad guests, the tourists coming to the Olympiad can come to the Sochi Olympic games without visas, just on the basis of accreditation. And they can get this accreditation at special windows open in all our diplomatic missions. But they don't need any visa first.

Secondly, we consider that in recent years we have built a unique site from the point of view of its ski piste mileage (150 kilometres) and as I mentioned more than 40 thousand hotel vacancies. Look, may be it is necessary to upgrade more the service quality, but in general the material base created here is very good for a big tourist centre of world class. I think that it will be very interesting to see - even for those who will not be able to come to the Olympiad - what is Sochi where the Olympiad took place. People over the world always show this interest in the Olympic games sites and we will be glad to see the winter sports fans coming to Sochi to look what Russia did here, how it put into practice this project. And if anyone likes it, this place may become a favourite resort for our friends from the United States or Europe, or Asian countries, including China, why not? We should not forget that people who love winter sports like to see different places, they go with pleasure to Canada, the United States, Switzerland, Italy or France and I hope will come to Sochi.

Now, let me say two words about visas. We offer exclusions for some tourist routes. For example, tourists coming by water transport may enter Saint-Petersburg without visa. We offer other exclusions as well. But we are talking about exclusions anyway while the general regime is as follows: all visa and visa-free access matters are regulated in the world on the basis of reciprocity. And we would like very much to reach an agreement on this visa-free access regime with our colleagues from the European Union. On many occasions I have already mentioned that the European Union has a visa-free access regime with a number of Latin America countries where the criminal situation is not better - and in many cases is worse - than in the Russian Federation. And where is Latin America, and where is Europe? If we look at Russia and Europe, they are too close from my point of view. Are not they?

That is why it seems to me that we should agree on a visa-free access regime in general. And as far as some exclusions are concerned, we may talk about some separate events.

Irada Zeynalova: Vladimir Vladimirovich, at the beginning of December you paid a three-days visit to Sochi with an inspection of Olympic sites. And you mentioned then that we should speak now not about the work done, but about the work that should be done, about the unfinished work, you stressed that it needed polish. Can we say that now everything is ready, what do they report to you? Where the difficulties were the most serious and what still has to be done if there is still such a case?

Vladimir Putin: Everything is already done and now we have to put it in order. We have to get hotels functioning well, we have to evacuate the construction equipment, we have to remove the construction waste that is to get ready to receive guests as any landlords and landladies do before receiving visitors. We have to get ready to receive guests in such a way that everything becomes beautiful and reflects the spirit of the event itself, that all sites become ready. As you know, they have already accepted many test competitions: some stages of the World Cup and other big international events. Competitors, our guests, specialists in general were satisfied and stressed the high degree of readiness a year ago - now all sites are finished.

Junyi Shui: Mr. President, before I put my question I would like to say this is the fifth interview in 14 years, sometimes I did it face to face, sometimes together with my colleagues. You are very popular in China. Before my coming here I said to our Internet users at Central TV that I was going to Russia to interview you. And as soon as I published this message two million users put an "I like it" mark next to it and sent many questions.

You have just mentioned that you invite tourists from different countries to come to Sochi. And what do you think about the Chinese investors coming after the Olympic Games to build hotels? What opportunities are there for Chinese investors in this situation?

Vladimir Putin: First of all, I would like to convey my best wishes to all my friends in China both through social networks and through other media. I know that I have many friends in China. It is not surprising, because we have a special relationship with China. And I have special feelings for China. China is a great country with a great culture, with very interesting, hard-working and talented people.

Give them a big thanks for such an attitude. This is a mutual feeling.

As far as investors are concerned, we will welcome investors from all countries, including from China. China has great investment potential. China is a country with the largest gold reserves. There are very good tools for investment in China, including a whole network of major funds. The Russian investment fund, the RDIF, works with some of these funds, with the largest Chinese investment funds. They already have joint projects.

Generally, it is quite difficult for foreign investors to find the most effective ways of investing their capital, which are efficient and well-protected at the same time. They often do it together with the relevant national bodies. Such a body, I have just talked about it, the RDIF, works with our Chinese partners, it can work in any region of the Russian Federation and in all areas.

If the Chinese partners will be interested in the tourism cluster in the south of the country or, say, the agriculture cluster, we have it here, near the Krasnodar and Stavropol regions: these are the neighbouring regions, for example, the Rostov region – this is our breadbasket, as we call it, these are the regions where agricultural production is particularly well developed, the climate here is very good. But in some regions, for example, in the Rostov region, which borders the Krasnodar region, the machine-building industry is also well-developed, the aviation cluster is developing, and in many of these areas we have promising, very interesting joint plans with our Chinese friends. That is why we invite them not only to Sochi and the Krasnodar region, but also to the southern part of the Russian Federation as a whole.

Irada Zeynalova: Mr. Putin, at all times and in all countries the Olympic Games have attracted extremists wishing to make a global name for themselves. Unfortunately, in the context of the recent terrorist attacks and threats in the south of Russia, we have to discuss that in relation to Sochi. Several agencies are working to ensure security of the Games, and European and American experts have offered their assistance. What reports do you receive regarding the scope of the threats, regarding what we are already confronting and what we will have to confront?

Vladimir Putin: You are right, extremists are always trying to make a name for themselves, especially in the run-up to some major event, and not only sports events, but also political ones. You know very well what security measures were taken during the meetings of the Heads of State within the framework of the Group of Twenty, the G8 or other forums, for example, APEC in the Asia- Pacific region. The same applies to major sports events. I have already spoken about this, and I want to repeat that extremists are usually narrow-minded people who do not realize that even if they, as they think, set themselves noble goals, by committing terrorist acts they are drifting further and further away from achieving those seemingly noble goals to the extent that these goals stop being relevant. The whole world considers them criminals, criminals in the worst sense of this word, bloodthirsty people who not only disregard human rights and freedoms, but also set a person's life at naught. No matter what motives they have for committing such acts, there will never be excuses for them, and in the eyes of all sensible people in the world they will always remain criminals. Therefore, they immediately cast a criminal shadow on the goals they set for themselves. But the world is what it is, we remember well the tragic events during the Olympic Games in Munich, when the Israeli sports delegation was killed almost in its entirety. And of course, since that time all countries in the world without exception make special, extraordinary security efforts.

We do everything with the understanding, with a clear understanding of the operational situation developing around Sochi and in the region as a whole, we have a perfect understanding of what it is, what is that threat, how to stop it, how to combat it. I hope that our law enforcement agencies will deal with it with honor and dignity, just as it was during other major sports and political events.

Irada Zeynalova: I worked as a correspondent at several Olympic Games, including the London ones, the last Olympic Games. And when we got there, we found out that Patriot missile launchers had been deployed on the roofs of houses in the North and East London. At first it certainly came as a shock like military ships anchored in the bay near Greenwich. But the British government explained: "The threat is massive, we will resist it, and it is a necessity." So that is exactly what happened – Patriot missile launchers were in place. Are we going to see something like that in Sochi?

Vladimir Putin: I hope you will not see anything, but we will do our best. As for London, we remember that one of the G8 summits there saw a number of terrorist attacks, including in the tube. I remember the painful reaction of the then British Prime Minister Tony Blair to the attacks, and I remember how we all provided him moral and, if necessary, special support. As an aside, now I also want to thank all our partners from North America, the United States, Europe, and Asia which engage in very active cooperation with their Russian counterparts in the law enforcement bodies and special services. Such joint work is ongoing.

Junyi Shui: Mr. President, Volgograd saw two terrorist attacks a month before the opening of the Sochi Olympics, and many people have some concerns about the sport event. We are convinced that Russia will be able to take even more serious security measures. But might they affect athletes and other participants?

Vladimir Putin: I would not want these acts of terrorism – crimes of the kind aimed at undermining international cooperation in the political, as well as, so to say, in the humanitarian area, including sports – to affect the upcoming activities. For if we allow ourselves to show weakness or fear, then we will assist terrorists in achieving their goals. I believe that the international community working in all areas – humanitarian, political, as well as economic – should unite to fight such inhuman phenomena as terror attacks and the murder of totally innocent people. We are the organizers, so our task, of course, is to ensure the safety of participants in the Olympic Games and its guests, and we will do our best.

Ed Hula: Mr. President, how do you plan to ensure an adequate level of security at the Olympics, and yet make it a happy and joyous occasion?

Vladimir Putin: Answering your colleagues' question I have already said that we will try to make sure that security measures do not seem an imposition, are not too conspicuous and do not put pressure on the athletes taking part in the Olympic Games and the guests and journalists present there. But at the same time we will do our best to make these measures effective.

Security is to be ensured by some 40 thousand law enforcement and special services officers. Of course, we will draw on the experience acquired during similar events in other regions of the world and in other countries. It means that we will protect our air and sea space, as well as the mountain cluster. I hope that it will be arranged so that it will not be evident and, as I have already said, will not, so to say, depress the participants in the Olympic Games.

I would also like to note that a special regime for movement of people and goods was introduced in the Greater Sochi area on 7 January 2014. We have round-the-clock headquarters to ensure security – I want to emphasize that it is round-the-clock – which coordinates the work of our law enforcement agencies and special bodies and maintains contacts with its counterparts abroad.

George Stephanopoulos: Mr. President, let me change the subject. I apologize. Some Americans going to Sochi have even developed their own plans for evacuation in case something happens. Are not you concerned that if something similar happens in other parts of Russia, these plans will be implemented?

Vladimir Putin: Russia is a big country, and, like in any other country, different things happen. We are working towards ensuring security in Sochi, using a lot of forces and means, but mostly those not employed in guaranteeing security in other regions of the Russian Federation. We have enough of such means provided by the Federal Security Service, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and army units, which will be used in ensuring security too, as I have already said, in the maritime area and airspace. If anybody feels it is necessary for them to design separate plans for guaranteeing their own security, it is okay as well, but, of course, it needs to be done keeping in touch with the Olympic Games organizers and our intelligence agencies. As I have already said, we have permanent round-the-clock headquarters maintaining contact with colleagues from the foreign countries' corresponding services and army units. By the way, these colleagues are represented in the headquarters, there is, I repeat, a direct professional interaction. If necessary, all these mechanisms can be used. I hope that it won't come to that. I have also already mentioned the way we performed quite well, say, holding important political events, including both G20 and G8 summits, and hosting major international competitions, like, for example, the recent World Championships in Athletics in Moscow. Understanding the full scope of our security sphere problems, we still have great experience in staging events of the kind, and we use it.

Andrew Marr: A lot of British politicians and celebrities, including Elton John, express concerns over the attitude towards homosexuals in Russia. I would like to ask you, do you think there are fundamental differences between the attitude towards homosexuals in the West and in Russia? Do you think homosexuals are born or made? And what does the concept of propaganda imply, is it philosophical?

Vladimir Putin: You know, I am not in a position to answer the part of your question concerning homosexuals being born or made. This is beyond my professional interest, and I just can't give you a qualified reply. And as I can't give you a qualified reply, I would just prefer to leave it at that. And as for the attitude towards individuals of non-traditional sexual orientation, yes, I can give you quite a detailed reply. I would like to draw your attention to the fact, that in Russia, as opposed to one third of the world's countries, there is no criminal liability for homosexuality. 70 countries in the world have criminal liability for homosexuality, and seven countries out of these 70 enforce the death penalty for homosexuality. And what does that mean? Does it mean that we should cancel all major sport events in those countries? I guess not.

The Soviet Union had criminal liability for homosexuality, today's Russia doesn't have such criminal liability. In our country, all people are absolutely equal regardless of their religion, sex, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. Everybody is equal. We have recently only passed a law prohibiting propaganda, and not of homosexuality only, but of homosexuality and child abuse, child sexual abuse. But this has nothing in common with persecuting individuals for their sexual orientation. And there is a world of difference between these things. So there is no danger for individuals of non-traditional sexual orientation who are planning to come to the Games as guests or participants.

Andrew Marr: And as for the Orthodox Church, it calls for returning criminal liability for homosexuality. What is your opinion about that?

Vladimir Putin: According to the law, the church is separate from the state and has the right to have its own point of view. I would also like to draw your attention to the fact that almost all traditional world religions are in full solidarity on this topic. And is the position of the Holy See different from that of the Russian Orthodox Church? And does Islam treat individuals with non-traditional sexual orientation in a different manner? It seems so, but this other position consists in a much tougher approach. Those 70 countries I have mentioned mostly belong to the Islamic world, and the ones enforcing death penalty all have Islam as state religion. Thus, there is nothing strange in the Russian Orthodox Church's opinion as compared to that of other traditional world religions, there is nothing strange in that, but I repeat once again: the opinion of the church is one thing, and the opinion of the state is another thing. The church is separate from the state.

Sergey Brilev: Vladimir Vladimirovich, perhaps, to add to the issue. You know, once I was lucky to meet the smartest and the most beautiful girl, and I have been married to her for a long time, well, generally speaking, my sexual orientation removes me a bit from being able to discuss this issue, but the thing is as follows.

All Russians of non-traditional sexual orientation, who I know, ok - not all, but the vast majority are people with excellent careers, who have never in their life-time faced any job restrictions and so on, though against the background of our bill to ban gay propaganda among minors, our country is getting the reputation of being just about the most anti-gay country on the planet, however, to a certain degree quite the opposite.

Vladimir Putin: It is not getting the reputation, there are attempts to create it.

Sergey Brilev: Yes, I agree. I wonder whether we should review this bill causing all the fuss that has, actually, little to do with its name or content, and to adjust it a bit? Probably with a view to offering not less sex education needed for children, but less sex, in general, available to minors, no matter if it is homosexual or heterosexual, what would be demanded by many people who are quite heterosexual. Or, probably, to really examine this notion. Frankly speaking, I have never come across gay propaganda among minors. Basically, I agree that I do not understand what it is in practice.

Vladimir Putin: Why so? Could you read the bill thoroughly, and pay your attention to its name. The bill's name is "Ban on propaganda of pedophilia and homosexuality". The bill banning pedophilia, propaganda of pedophilia and homosexuality. There are countries, including European, where public discussions – I have just talked about this at the meeting with volunteers – for instance, on the possibility to legalize pedophilia currently take place. Public discussions in parliaments. They may do whatever they want, but peoples of the Russian Federation, the Russian people have their own cultural code, own tradition. It's not our business and we do not poke our nose into their affairs, and we ask for the same respect for our traditions and for our culture. My personal view is that the society should look after its children at least to be able to reproduce and not only thanks to migrants, but on its own base. We achieved what we had not experienced for a long time. In 2002, 2003, 2004 it seemed that we would never redress that absolutely terrible situation we had with the demographic crisis. It appeared that it was a demographic pit that would prove to have no bottom and we would continue investing in it endlessly.

And at that time we developed and adopted a program aimed at supporting demography, to increase birth rates in the Russian Federation. Frankly speaking, I was much worried myself: we allocated a big volume of resources, and many experts used to tell me: "Don't do this, anyway, there is such a trend, which is experienced by many European countries. And we won't avoid it as well". This year in Russia, the number of newborns has exceeded the number of deceased for the first time. We achieved a specific positive result. If anybody would like to focus on, so to say, developing the cemetery, they are welcome. But we have different goals: we want the Russian people and other peoples of the Russian Federation to develop and to have historical prospects. And we should clean up everything that impedes us here. But we should do this in a timely and humane manner without offending anybody and without including anybody in a group of secondary people.

It seems to me that the bill we adopted does not hurt anybody. Moreover, people of non-traditional sexual orientation cannot feel like inferior people here, because there is no professional, career or social discrimination against them, by the way. And when they achieve great results, such as, for instance Elton John achieves, who is an extraordinary person, a distinguished musician, and millions of our people sincerely love him with no regard to his sexual orientation, and his sexual orientation does not affect attitudes to him, especially as to a distinguished musician. I think that this quite democratic approach to people of non-traditional sexual orientation alongside with measures aimed to protect children and future demographic development is optimum.

Junyi Shui: I also would like to proceed on discussing this issue of homosexuality.

Irada Zeynalova: And I would like to ask why we are discussing this issue in the context of Sochi when we gathered to speak about Sochi?

Junyi Shui: But I would like to continue.There were talks that the snow of 2014 in Sochi would be lonely because many Western countries spoke about homosexuality, about oppression of homosexuals in Russia, and those messages reached China. By the way, in 1980 there were also attempts to boycott the Soviet Olympic Games in Moscow for different reasons, and it was the same case at the Beijing Olympic Games. Why do such voices appear when a country is developing, for instance, China is developing, Russia is developing? What do you think, may be these are manifestations of the "cold war"?

Vladimir Putin: I don't think that these are manifestations of the "cold war", but it is a demonstration of competition. When such a powerful country, potentially powerful country as China starts showing rapid pace of growth, it becomes a real competitor in global politics and in the global markets, and, of course, tools to restrain such growth are switched on. Probably, you know that once Napoleon said that China was sleeping, and let it sleep as long as possible. This is a traditional attitude of Western Civilization towards the East, and towards China, in particular. But China has awakened. And I think that the right option to develop relations with such a big, potentially powerful and great country as China is to search for shared interests, but not to restrain. I believe that some old approaches towards Russia still exist from the perspective that there is a need to restrain something.

And as for the issue that we cannot leave, I would like to say the following. I explained that homosexuality is a criminal offence in 70 countries. The same is in the USA. It is still a criminal offence in some states of the United States, for instance in Texas, and may be in another three states. But what the heck, we shouldn't hold any international competitions, should we? Why does nobody speak about this and why do they speak about us, though we do not have criminal liability for this. What is this, if not an attempt to restrain? This is a remnant of the previous, old way of thinking and this is bad.

It is even worse when it comes to major sports events, especially Olympic Games. I know what many top US politicians that I respect and that are respected across the world think. They believe that the boycott of the Moscow Olympics, for all the serious grounds it had - I mean the introduction of Soviet troops in Afghanistan - was a great mistake even in those circumstances. Indeed, any major international competition, and Olympic Games first and foremost, are intended to depoliticize the most pressing international issues and open additional ways to build bridges. It is unwise to miss such opportunities, and it is far more unwise to burn such bridges.

Ed Hula: President Obama has appointed Billie Jean King and other members of the delegation who would represent the United States in Sochi. There are homosexual athletes. Do you believe it to be a political component of the Olympic Games? What political background does it create for the Olympic, if there are homosexuals there? Will you meet Billie Jean King as the head of the US Delegation in Sochi?

Vladimir Putin: People have different sexual orientation. We would welcome all athletes and all guests at the Olympics. At some point President Obama asked me to help make arrangements for a large US delegation to come. His request was related to a limited membership of relevant national teams, including both athletes and members of various administrative bodies. The International Olympic Committee has its rules, but we did the best we could. We found solutions to that, bearing in mind that the US has traditionally had a larger delegation at the Olympic Games than other countries, they have a large team and many representatives. We complied with their request. So, I certainly will be glad to see the representatives of any countries, including the United States, there can be no doubts as to that. If they would like to meet me and discuss anything, they are welcome, I see no problems about it.

George Stephanopoulos: President Obama said he was offended by the act on gay propaganda. He has also recently said that if there are no gay sportsmen and sportswomen in Russia, its team will be weaker. However, if they start protesting, meaning gays and lesbians, will they be prosecuted under this anti-propaganda act if they decide to hold protest actions?

Vladimir Putin: … protest actions and propaganda are after all two slightly different things. They are similar but if we look at this from the legal point of view, a protest against a law is not propaganda of homosexuality itself or child sexual abuse. That is first point.

Second point, I would like to ask our colleagues – my colleagues and friends – before trying to criticize, to solve the problem in their own home first. But I have already said that it is well known. In some US states, homosexuality is criminally punishable. And how can they criticize us for a far gentler and more liberal approach to these issues compared to the one they have at home? However, I understand that it is difficult to do since there are a lot of people in the US itself that share the view that the laws of their state or of their country are just, reasonable and correspond with the sentiments of the larger part of its citizens. But we need to discuss this in some more appropriate international forums, to elaborate some common approaches. Anyway, we have got the message. And I am telling you that none of our guests will have any problems.

We remember how some African-American citizens of the US protested during the Olympic Games – a large-scale international competition – against segregation. I saw that myself on the TV screen. But that is all in all a general practice aimed at stating one's rights.

Sergey Brilev: Vladimir Vladimirovich, if you would allow me to return to sport-related issues - you know, I remember that when London was getting ready for the Olympic Games, the British press made it seem as if something terrible was happening in the United Kingdom. And then a wonderful celebration of sport happened. Later on, however, when Mitt Romney, candidate for the US presidency, arrived in London and repeated the exact same things the London newspapers were writing, the latter rebuked him saying "do not dare, we will manage on our own, and we have a celebration of sport ahead of us". And that is the kind of celebration that we now have ahead of us. The last time this country hosted the Olympic Games I was eight and I am sure that millions of people are expecting this large event.

You ski and play hockey; what competitions are you planning to attend? What are you planning to see, just for yourself? What results are you expecting from the Russian national team?

Vladimir Putin: I have already been asked this question. I can say that I will be able to attend competitions only on those days when I am free from the current work and this is not going to totally coincide with my sport preferences. But if I could go and see the competitions I am interested in, that would of course be hockey and alpine skiing. I would also watch with great pleasure biathlon and figure skating.

George Stephanopoulos: I was just wondering whether you and Barack Obama made a bet what country would get more medals: the U.S. or Russia?

Vladimir Putin: No, we never make such bets. Barack himself loves sports very much, I can see it, he pays due attention and not only to going in for sports, but also to the development of sport. Practically all American presidents as we can see pay great attention and act effectively, that is why the team of the United States traditionally achieves very good and impressive results. We wish success to our American friends, the American athletes. I know that a lot of people in our country, millions of people admire American athletes and truly sincerely love them. As I have already said I would like very much the sports not to be soiled by the politics. And I think that we all will benefit from this.

But, of course, first of all we will support our athletes. We traditionally have good results in winter sports. In previous years, because of the change of generations, and frankly, and I also have already spoken about it,because of the loss of training bases we had a certain failure, decline, including a not very bright performance in Vancouver, although in general there we performed in a proper manner. We expect that the situation will improve and that the scores, including the number of medals will grow. Although it is important, it is still much more important for us, for Russia, to create a favorable environment for the Games and to conduct them in a proper manner. And it is very important that our athletes have shown their worth, showed their character and skill.

And as far as the medals are concerned, it is also an essential element of any sports competition, including the Olympic one. But for me it is even more important to see that we have a viable, efficient team that holds promise.

Andrew Marr: Mr. President, before this sports festival starts there have been a lot of amnesties in Russia, in particular concerning the Greenpeace. Some critics say that you just "are making a forced smile".

Are these real liberal efforts in the framework of Russian policy or just such a step for popularity?

Vladimir Putin: What kind of answer do you want to hear from me?

Andrew Marr: I would like you to say, "I am a real liberal and hold liberal-views".

Vladimir Putin: It's true. And one more thing, we adopted the Amnesty Law not in connection with the Olympics, but in honor of the 20th Anniversary of the Russian Constitution. That is first.

Journalist Kieron Bryan (R), who was detained in Russia with greenpeace activists, embraces his brother Russell at St Pancras International train station in London on December 27, 2013 after arriving back in Britain following an amnesty. (AFP Photo / Justin Tallis)

In the second place, in accordance with our law the decision on the amnesty was not made by the President. It is an exclusive prerogative of the Parliament. It is not me who made the decision on the amnesty, but the Parliament. So I "cannot make a forced smile". It is not my merit, but the merit of the deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation. But I certainly support this initiative and believe that it is correct. And in this connection I would like to note that we are probably record-holders for the number of amnesties concerned. Here we also should strike a certain balance between those who committed the crimes and the victims of these crimes. We talk a lot about the situation of the sentenced prisoners or persons under investigation. And that is correct, we should never forget about it, especially as the situation in the places of detention in our country, as well as abroad, by the way, in many countries, is not the best. But we should never push to the sidelines the people who became victims of the crimes. Here the position of the State towards these problems should be balanced.

Irada Zeynalova: Vladimir Vladimirovich, while we have been talking the storm has already become so strong that the mountains cannot be seen, it snows more and more. It turns out that the Winter Games, as well as the Summer ones, generally speaking, have one more organizer that is the weather. The weather forecast has reminded a guess lately. Unfortunately, the models do not work. Let's say, will we modify the weather during the Sochi Olympics or will we hope for a good luck? For example, in Turin a few days of competition were canceled just because of fog and because of snow. Will we do something with the weather so that the Games are on the schedule?

Vladimir Putin: No, we will do nothing. Unfortunately, we are and will always be dependent on nature. As you know, Australia, which is now hosting a major tennis tournament, is facing an extreme heat wave with temperature over 40°C resulting in some competitors fainting from the heat. It started to snow rather unexpectedly here and if weather conditions do not meet the standards of the competition, the representatives of the International Olympic Committee will decide what to do about it. However, I do hope that the conditions will be favourable, as the weather data for many years show thatfrom the first half of February to the end of March, this region generally has very favourable weather for winter sports. I hope that despite all the fluctuations it will not be an exception this time.

Irada Zeynalova: So, we will not need the thousands of tons of snow that we have stored somewhere in the glaciers, will we?

Vladimir Putin: Well, it is obvious that there is no need for them now, but we have stored them just in case. We have seen major international winter competitions, say, skiing races, with just a narrow snow path for the skiers and green grass on both sides of it. Thank God, it is not the case here and I hope that it will not be.

Junyi Shui: Mr President, as I have already said there have been many questions from Chinese people before my arrival. I have printed only a small part of them relating to the Games and you personally. China is not very strong in terms of winter sports. What results do you expect from the Chinese team at the Sochi Olympics? In addition, some wonder in what sport you perform worst yourself. In general, is there anything in the world that you do not know how to do? It seems that you have mastered everything.

Vladimir Putin: There is a famous saying: "The more I know, the more I realise that I know nothing." I think that it applies to all people, including me.

As for sports, I really love them, both winter and summer sports. The expectations as to China's results, whether at Summer, or Winter Olympics, are usually high. China has developed an extremely efficient way of preparing and motivating its athletes. Note, it is very important that preparation go hand in hand with motivation.

I watched with great attention the way China grows a young generation of athletes, the way it selects them, the way they are trained and the way their psychological attitudes are shaped. There are plenty of lessons to learn there. With strong internal motivation like this people achieve maximum results.

Members of China's speed skating team (Reuters / Andy Clark)

Certainly, China has traditionally developed summer sports rather than winter ones. Yet this is just a matter of adjusting the pattern. If China has made this adjustment or makes it in the near future, I believe that it will turn into a major competitor for those countries who have traditionally been developing winter sports. We expect that Chinese athletes will demonstrate spectacular performance. We look forward that they both please and surprise the winter sports lovers from around the world. They can do it.

Ed Hula: Is it important for the success of the Winter Olympics and for your satisfaction with the Games that Russian team wins a medal in ice hockey? How important is this to you?

Vladimir Putin: I should be honest, it does matter. Not for me personally, not to satisfy any ambition. Rather, it is important for the millions of our ice hockey fans. Ice hockey has traditionally been very popular in this country, and although it has been viewed as a Canadian sport, I believe it to be equally a Russian one. We are very grateful to Canadians for having invented this game, as well as to those who brought it to this country. It would be no exaggeration to say that ice hockey is loved by millions of people, with hundreds of thousands of people playing it and millions of people watching the matches. Certainly, ice hockey matches are always spectacular and memorable. I would like to stress that in ice hockey, just like in any other sport, we expect success and victory, yet what is most important is that excellence and character are demonstrated. It would be the main result that our sports and particularly ice hockey fans see that our athletes have made the best of their character, excellence and talent. Then nobody will reproach them for a failure to achieve a desired result. If they do achieve it, we will be very grateful to our athletes. Yet, let me repeat, there is no point in making any forecasts or prior assessments. We are very well aware of the fact that ice hockey has been developing all over the world and, which is of great pleasure to us, it has been developing in Europe. Finnish and Swedish teams have traditionally remained strong, with Switzerland and Germany making great advances, not to mention the United States and Canada. We would be very glad that these outstanding athletes come and show their talents here, in Russia. We are very grateful to all of our partners and to all of these prominent athletes. We would be very glad to see and to welcome them here and look forward to enjoying their game.

Junyi Shui: Mr President, let me change the subject of our conversation to the role of the Olympics for Russia. I have heard you calling the Olympics your baby, your project. I have also heard people saying that your contribution was a key factor why Russia has the chance to host them. You also mentioned that you could make Russia a strong and powerful country within 20 years. Is there a connection between Sochi Olympics and your vision of a strong Russia? Some media even say it is somehow linked to your future political career. Can you comment on that?

Vladimir Putin: As you know, there is a strong connection between the Olympic Games, the progress in sport and the successful development of a country in general, because great sport achievements are mostly a result of effective economic and social policies. Russia wanted to host the Olympic Games in 1994 and in early 2000s, but I believe it was obvious to both Russia and the International Olympic Committee that it was very hard for the country due to pure economic reasons. Russia's GDP and household incomes have almost doubled and even though our gold and foreign currency reserves of over USD 500bn cannot match those of China, we still rank third in the world on this indicator. The Russian Government has two reserve funds. Over the recent years, we have nearly always had a surplus budget. Last year, we had just a meagre deficit of -0.5% per cent, which is insignificant. We have paid off all our external debts.The trade balance surplus is about USD 196bn, although I may be mistaken with exact figures. This means that our economic development and economic growth empower us to carry out such projects. We have become the fifth world economy not in terms of income per capita, but in terms of GDP and purchasing power parity. It is quite an achievement. Just like any other country, we have our difficulties, but the results achieved allow us to reach social goals, including those in the demographic sphere that we have already mentioned today. I would like to recall the fact that now the number of births in Russia is higher than the number of deaths for the first time in 20 years. It enables us to raise salaries in the social services sector, including health care and education. All these factors create a solid basis for sport achievements that, in turn, will positively influence the demographics. We may even seek progress in sport, including or even mostly, a means to create favourable demographic conditions and improve the health of the nation. Such major events as world championships, European championships and Olympic Games encourage people, especially young ones, to do sports, help to facilitate mass sport participation, which certainly has a positive impact on the health of the nation, and make sport popular, interesting, and fashionable. I believe all of this to be of extreme importance, it is not just my ambitions and it is the interests of the state and its people in their purest form. No doubt, it gives me great pleasure to see us do that, but again, not because of my ambitions.

Torchbearer posing for a photo with children in Ufa, the regional capital of the Volga River region of Bashkortostan, about 1200 kilometers (750 miles) east of Moscow. (AFP Photo)

There is also a certain moral aspect here and there is no need to be ashamed of it. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, after the dark and, let us be honest, bloody events in the Caucasus, the society had a negative and pessimistic attitude. We have to pull ourselves together and realise that we can deliver large-scale projects on time and with high standards of quality, and by projects I mean not only stronger defence potential, but also developments in the humanitarian sphere, including in sport. I believe that all this is a step in the right direction, as it strengthens the morale of the nation, as well as its social and health care sectors and creates conditions for future development.

Junyi Shui: In your opinion, what image of Russia will the Sochi Olympic Games convey to the world, what history can they tell?

Vladimir Putin: I would like the participants, guests, journalists and all those who watch the Games on TV and learn about them from the mass media to see a new Russia, see its personality and its possibilities, take a fresh and unbiased look at the country. And I am sure that this will happen, it has to bring about good and positive results and it will help Russia to establish relations with its partners around the world.

Andrew Marr: You sound very convincing. You have been named third most influential person in the world, ahead of the Pope. Do you think it is possible for you to stand for election once again? Do you consider such a possibility? Or maybe someone has got bored?

Vladimir Putin: I believe one should not pay attention to such ratings. Besides, no person can get the better of the Pope. Such a comparison is irrelevant. The Pope is in charge of the biggest state in the world. The state which has no formal characteristics. How to say it in the modern language to put it correctly, this is a kind of a network state. You see? But it is real and not virtual, as there are quite a number of Catholics in the world, a billion people already. Besides, here we talk about spiritual influence which is more important than political one.

We have orthodox religious leaders as well. First of all, this is Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia. I have enormous respect for this person. He contributes a lot to the spiritual strengthening of our people, and not only the Orthodox, because he cooperates with other representatives of traditional Russian religions in order to promote interreligious and interethnic peace. So Russian Orthodox Church carries out great work in this respect which has positive results.

As for ratings, I reiterate that I do not think them important. The situation changes every day. One can never be guided by them. The most important thing in any sphere of activity is to feel that you are a professional and to constantly increase your level of expertise and the quality of your work.

Concerning ambitions, it is too early to speak about this. We are in 2014 now; elections are to be held in 2018. It is necessary to work now, and then we will see. The worst and the most dangerous thing that can happen to a politician is holding on to power by all means and focusing only on this. In such a situation the failure is inevitable as you are always afraid of making a wrong step. This is not what you should think of; you should focus on the results of your work. Time will tell.

Sergey Brilev: Mr. Putin, let me speak about the future and the past at the same time. I was lucky to be in Guatemala when Sochi was chosen to host the Olympics. It was at that moment that our paralympians showed their worth so clearly.

Vladimir Putin: Yes.

Sergey Brilev: The future after the Olympics includes Paralympic Games.

Vladimir Putin: Right.

Sergey Brilev: I do not know if this was planned or not, but now the city of Sochi, and not only those exemplary parts of it that are intended for the Olympics, but also those that have fewer foreigners and more Russian people, as well as other Russian cities are becoming more friendly toward not only paralympians but disabled persons as well. This is quite visible. Much has to be done as the disabled still face many bitter things, but progress has started. Was this your intention when you brought in paralympians then?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, it was. Moreover, we have a federal programme on the so-called barrier free environment. Unfortunately, I have to admit that in creating such a barrier free environment we fall greatly behind many other countries of the world. I really regret it, but it developed like this since the Soviet times. And I am greatly pleased that we are leaving this negative tradition behind. We adopted the programme on a barrier free environment. It is being implemented differently in different regions, and this obviously requires additional financing. But I would really like Sochi to serve as an example of how the problem of a barrier free environment can be solved, this was my initial plan. Here this was done from scratch drawing upon the highest modern standards. And I reiterate that from the very beginning I wanted the programme on a barrier free environment in Sochi to become a good example for other Russian regions.

As for our paralympians, they are all outstanding athletes.I cannot but feel gratitude when I mention them, because they win more medals than our Olympic team. This is first, and it is very important. Secondly, it is actually quite obvious that they serve as an example for people with and without disabilities, example of how one can and should become strong morally to keep moving forward and enjoy life fully. Regretfully, our state is still far from meeting all the needs of the disabled people in the contemporary world. When our paralympians achieve outstanding results, by doing so they push the state to address those issues. I feel very grateful to them and, of course, I count on their brilliant performance during these Paralympic Games. By the way, many media do not pay enough attention to them… some more than others though. There is a small channel called RBC, I think, that provides a regular commentary on the paralympians. I do not see that on federal TV channels though.

SERGEY BRYLEV:I heard you, Vladimir Vladimirovich.

George Stephanopoulos: Since 2007 you invested so much in the Olympic Games. How would you measure success in Sochi? Will it influence your reputation and is it a question of honor for you?

Vladimir Putin: I want it to be a success of the country. As I said, we are hosts, and the goal number one for us… not in sports but for the state… is to create good conditions for athletes, guests, journalists, tourists so that people come to an international celebration of sports, a number one winter sports event this year, and be in the center of this celebration, so that millions of sports fans throughout the world feel it even if they are hundreds or thousands miles away from Sochi. This is our main task. Of course, people in Russia should also see that our country can hold such events and be a part of this celebration. This is first.

Another very important thing is that it should influence the development of mass sports in the country, it is one of the key goals. Of course, we expect good results from our athletes. This is not an exhaustive list, I mention only obvious things, but if all these elements are there, it will be a success. In a way, it would be my success as well as of the Russian Government, of the regional authorities, of all those who prepared and conducted this work, from builders, designers and engineers to common workers. Certainly, it will be their success, and I will be happy if all that is done properly. I am sure they will be happy as well. So, it is not going to be my personal success but of a whole country. I hope it will happen.

Irada Zeynalova: When you won the presidential elections, you came out to a square, and we all could see how emotional you were. Preparation of the Olympic Games is a much more complex and time-consuming task than any electoral campaign. Have you ever thought about March 18th, about how this supercomplex task would be fulfilled?

Vladimir Putin: No. I was thinking about the schedule to prepare this event. After that, I was thinking how to deal with the first, second, third stage of preparation, how well one thing is done and how we can address the other. I would say it was a general and a stage-by-stage approach towards dealing with the issues. I never thought much about how someone may look at it.

Irada Zeynalova: On March 18 everybody is leaving, you see off the guests and you finally get the time for a late celebration of New Year, like all people who were busy with Sochi Games. Did you think how to celebrate the New Year?

Vladimir Putin: No, I think there will be other things to be taken care of.

George Stephanopoulos: You said that it is necessary to promote fitness, sports. We know that you practice judo and play hockey. How do you stay in shape, is it important for you?

Vladimir Putin: How to control one's weight? Don't overeat. How to stay in shape? Practice sports. No magic pills here. I do something everyday. Yesterday I skied here till 1.30 am, today morning I exercised in a gym, I swim about 1000 meters almost every day. Nothing special, but on a regular basis. You know the saying, chicken pecks grain after grain.

Junyi Shui: I also have a personal question which was also asked by Chinese Internet users. Have you thought about what you are going to do when you retire? Chinese users believe that you are very handsome and masculine. Maybe you will play tough guys in cinema?

Vladimir Putin: That's unlikely. Maybe I will play hockey. We have recently created our own NHL. It is not called National Hockey League but Night Hockey League where non-professional 40+ people can play. I was very glad to see that this initiative is followed throughout the Russian Federation. Teams are now created in every region, they hold competitions, and the final is held in Moscow or in Sochi, like it was last year. More than a hundred teams arrived from all Russia's regions. Two and a half years ago I was not able to stand on skates at all. You may have seen that now I am already trying to do something. That's what I like. If and when I retire, I will try to do things that I like.

Junyi Shui: Thank you.

Comments

Enrique 20.01.2014 01:13

The present Russian Federation doesn´t have enemies, I mean nations which are taken by Russia as an enemy. All nations in the World are Russian partners, one way or another: trade, R&D, tourism, space exploration...

Different can be the case of certain political groups in some countries, which want to create a false impression about Russia as a threat instead of as a partner.

Fortunatel y, the last group has failed even if they still continue with their propaganda.

Games are a gift to the whole World, not just for Russia, and if athletes and TV viewers from the World enjoy, that is better for everybody. Enjoy.

[Jan 18, 2014]What other accusations "partners" are hung on the Sochi Olympics ?

Jan 18, 2014 | topwar.ru

Sorry but again, we need to touch the theme of Olympics in Sochi...

Well, what we can do if new reasons to discuss it was provided by our foreign "partners" , many of which just can't sleep because this most important international sporting event is held in Russia

One imagining that in Russia on every corner people with a long beard in hard boots and ugly "fufayka" , tied with hemp instead of morning coffee drink the blood of gays and transvestites and lesbians, sharing it with tame bears. Other are preoccupied with the vision of Vladimir Putin personally shooting from "Maxim" machine gun right on the Red Square Russian sportsmen who lost their events on Olympics. Yet another can't sleep because of cost overruns that the sad fact that gold and tresures which were are safely hold in the distant mines since the time of Ivan the Terrible were waisted on Sochi Olympics; by modest estimated no less that a kvadragintillion dollars ...

united forever!

360 years ago Ukraine joined Russian empire. See also http://topwar.ru/38544-360-let-nazad-ukraina-vossoedinilas-s-rossiey-bitva-za-maluyu-rus.html
Jan. 19, 2014 | putnik1.livejournal.com

putnik1

Интереснейший отчет дорогой varjag_2007 о Торжественном Собрании Собора Славянских народов Беларуси, России, Украины, посвященном 360-летней годовщины Переяславской Рады, - здесь, а лучше всех, на мой взгляд, - хотя умных и достойных людей собралось немало, - прокомментировал событие Патриарх Московский и Всея Руси Кирилл: действительно, "На том собрании была выражена воля наших предков, осознавших важность сохранения духовной свободы, православной веры и единства в ней народов, родственных по мироощущению, происхождению и историческому выбору. Сегодня мы призваны творчески осмыслить уроки прошлого, в том числе связанные с преодолением разделений, помнить об ответственности за судьбы сограждан и единоверцев, дабы семена разобщенности не давали своих пагубных всходов в сердцах людей"

[Jan 18, 2014] The Party of Regions is convinced that EuroMaidan is a "special operation" of the West

That view explains rush adoption of Foreign Agents Registration Act directed agains subversive activities of globalization Fifth column. It looks like "The current situation in Ukraine points to the typical scenario of use of technology of color revolutions." See also Ukrainian anti-Sharp leaflet by the Party of Regions
pravda.com.ua

EuroMaidan for power that be is the "fifth column ", which seeks to shed blood in the streets .

journalist Svyatoslav Tseholko wrote this in his Facebook page says , referring to the arguments which operate in the Party of Regions (PR).

"During an interview with the leader of the Party of Regions faction Oleksandr Yefremov had showen the set of assumption which PR uses for the event. Fron which one can logically deduct that EuroMaidan means for ruling party a fifth column, which seeks to shed blood in the streets . This fifth column" try to stick on the government labels "dictatorship" and discredit law enforcement bodies

They view announcement of persons as persona non grata, sanctions of Western institutions, the work of NGOs, speeches of prominent foreign officials within Ukraine, as well as criticism of the MSM and social networking sites as a preplanned operation against legitimate government. With the explicit purpose of a " liquidation of the ruling power," which considered desirable outcome of the actions.

Also, the PR leaflet describes the role of the West as " curator of the revolution ." They remind about analogies with Arab Spring in North Africa and the Middle East, "color " revolutions in Georgia , Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Belarus, Moldova and Russia in 2011, Lebanon, Tunisia, Libya.

PR leaflet also states that "the current situation in Ukraine points to the typical scenario of use of technology of color revolutions."

"The emergence EuroMaidan is due to a interaction of subjective and objective internal factor with external factors including the geopolitical interests of foreign powers" - the PR materials state.

"Based on reading of the leaflet it is clear that the Party of Regions is concerned about "weakening of positions of Russia" on the territory of Ukraine due to by funding of various Ukrainian NGOs by American organizations such as USAID, IRI, NDI"

[Jan 18, 2014] Mutual attraction is stronger the attempts to make Russia and Ukraine enemies - Azarov

January 18, 2014 | podrobnosti.ua

In greeting the Assembly of the Slavic peoples of Ukraine, Russia and Belarus Prime Minister Mykola Azarov said that Pereyaslavskaya Rada held exactly 360 years ago, has become a historical even for the people of Ukraine and Russia that to a large extent shaped their fate.

Participants of the cathedral - the State Duma and the Verkhovna Rada , prominent public figures , prominent scholars - discussed historical and contemporary importance of the decisions Pereyaslavska Cossack Rada in 1654 , which signified the unification of Russia and Ukraine.

" Pereyaslavskaya Parliament thereby became a great event , which for centuries has determined the spiritual, cultural , civilizational development of Ukraine, Russia and Belarus " , - Azarov .

Assessing the significance of the Assembly of Slavic nations, the Prime Minister noted that it " such movement is especially relevant today ," since it is based on " the broadest support in the community and has a strong potential for development ." " Mutual attraction is undoubtedly stronger persistent attempts to engender mutual mistrust and hostility between the two brotherly nations," - said Azarov .

[Jan 17, 2014] Dances with hungry wolfs

I can't judge the quality and importance of new laws. Yanukovich demonstrated absolute legal nihilism by passing the law which provides amnesty to participants of Maidan. Also none of current laws are in force and if so, what is the importance of new laws? Looks like Yanukovich is more worried about his clan capitals then the country. But this interview by Oleg Tsaryov is something different from a typical comprador position of Party of Regions (which almost all voted for amnesty). Hard pressure and inconvenient sharp questions for more then an hour from pretty professional fifth column agents, who are outrages by the possibility of losing their plush salaries. My God, this was a pressure of the level at which Bill O'Reilly look like a petty and somewhat shy school bully in comparison with those wolfs of media business. Looks like "grant eaters" who feel threat to their hard currency income flows instantly turn into very dangerous and very hungry wolfs. List listen to the interview... No matter how you judge the new laws, this guy really fought like a lion against pack of wolfs exited by the possibility of losing their hard currency flows.
Jan 17, 2014


Очень длинная беседа.

Не всякому хватит времени выдержать столько, да еще и на двух мовах.
Я выдержал, так ведь я в материале и ловлю контексты.
Так, - на всякий случай, - дублирую аннотацию из Ютуба.
К ней, как говорится, ни убавить, ни прибавить.

"Сотрудники американского "Громадского" ТВ, журналистами их не назовёшь, для очередной травли, пригласили в студию депутата Олега Царёва. 2,5 часа прямого эфира, получая указания по ноутбукам, ведущие выполняли заказ своих американских хозяев - морально уничтожали народного депутата...

Схема простая - увести человека от привычной формы общения, наброситься всей стаей на одного и не связными вопросами, подборкой выборочных фактов, мешая ему отвечать на вопросы, превратить диалог фактически в судебный процесс, на котором приглашённый гость должен быть выставлен, как подсудимый, виновный в совершённом преступлении.

Тема беседы при этой схеме не имеет значения.

Так ведущие "Громадского" поступают со всеми кого им заказывают их владельцы.

Для этих целей и был создан данный информационный канал. О журналистской этики, морали, чести и человеческом достоинстве сотрудников этого канала и речи не идёт.

Хотя и не удивительно, предателями всегда становились "моральные уроды" из разных слоёв общества..."

От себя: все, что за истекшие два месяца я узнал о ранее почти неизвестном мне депутате Царёве, говорило о том, что Олег Анатольевич честный, умный и сильный человек.

Но даже не представить не мог, насколько умный и настолько сильным. Сто пятьдесят две минуты с секундами выстоять один на один против стаи бойцовых псов на их территории и, более того, победить - это дорогого стоит.

Это, скажу я вам, куда выше депутатского уровня.

Tags:

[Jan 17, 2014] Утащил из FB - ППКС

Игорь Караулов:
"Гайдаровский форум" в России - столь же уместное название, что и "Менгелевские чтения" в Германии. Был такой Менгеле, знаете ли. Врач. И теперь другие врачи в память о нём прочтут вам свои доклады о том, как жить долго и счастливо".

Андрей Илларионов:
"Обсуждать экономику на форуме имени Гайдара – это всё равно что обсуждать историю на форуме имени Фоменко".

[Jan 17, 2014] Ужасы украинской тирании.

Jan. 17, 2014

Плачу от возмущения, соратники! И вместе со мною плачут в фэйсбуке херои евромайдана, рассказывая об ужасах последних законов, которые приняты против героев Украины:

В УК возвращена статья о клевете, предполагающая до двух лет колонии. Такие же наказания введены за "групповое нарушение общественного порядка" и за сбор информации о судье. За сбор информации о сотрудниках силовых структур предусмотрено до трех лет колонии, так же как и за распространение экстремистских материалов. В кодекс введена также новая статья о блокировании доступа к жилью. Санкция по ней составит до шести лет колонии. До семи лет грозит за угрозу сотруднику силовой структуры. Наконец, за массовые беспорядки вводится наказание до 15 До двух лет колонии грозит за "публичное отрицание или оправдание преступлений фашизма. Намного более суровое наказание - до 12 лет - введено за разрушение памятников советским солдатам.

При этом постановление по административному или приговор по уголовному делу теперь может быть вынесен привлекаемому заочно.

Кроме того, Рада поддержала изменения в регламент парламента, которые упрощают порядок предоставления согласия по привлечению к уголовной ответственности, задержанию или аресту народных депутатов. Резко сокращен срок рассмотрения запроса правоохранительных органов.

Наряду с этим были освобождены от ответственности сотрудники милиции, избивавшие участников Евромайдана. Этот законопроект депутатам удалось принять только после повторного голосования.

Также Радой принят закон об НКО - "иностранных агентах", в целом аналогичный российскому. Общественное объединение признается участвующим в политической деятельности, если оно участвует в организации и проведении политических акций, "которые имеют целью воздействие на принятие решений государственными органами, изменение определенной ими государственной политики, а также для формирования мнения общества в указанных целях". "Иностранные агенты" будут облагаться налогом иначе, чем некоммерческие организации, и вынуждены будут в названии указывать свой "агентский" статус.

Кроме того, введена норма о запрете некоммерческим организациям и церквям вести "экстремистскую деятельность".

Теги:

Nina L. Khrushcheva examines the affinities between Russia's leader and Argentina's post-war strongman. - Project Syndicate

When a regular "Anglo-American operative" spread disinformation that looks less offensive then a relative of Soviet dictator does the same.

Putin the Perónist

Russian President Vladimir Putin has been compared to many strongmen of the past – Joseph Stalin, Leonid Brezhnev, and Chile's Augusto Pinochet, to name a few. But, after nearly 14 years in power, perhaps the best comparison now may be a transgender cross between the former Argentine leader Juan Perón and his legendary wife, Eva ("Evita").

In the early 1940's, Colonel Perón, as Minister of Labor and Secretary of War, was a "gray cardinal" to Argentina's rulers. Before communism collapsed in 1989, Colonel Putin, also memorably gray, was a devoted KGB operative, entrusted with spreading disinformation and recruiting Soviet and foreign agents in East Germany. [ that's a dangerous simplification --NNB]

At the labor ministry, Perón initiated social reforms, including welfare benefits for the poor. Although his motivation, at least in part, may have been a desire for social justice, Perón was, in effect, bribing the beneficiaries to support his own rise to power and wealth. With his beautiful and outspoken wife – a "woman of the people" – at his side, Perón was able to persuade voters in 1946 that, as President, he would fundamentally change the country.

He was as good as his word. Perón's government nationalized banks and railroads, increased the minimum wage and improved living standards, reduced the national debt (for a while at least), and revived the economy. Argentina became less reliant on foreign trade, though the move toward autarky eventually undermined growth, causing the country to lose its position among the world's richest.

During this period, Perón also undermined freedom of speech, fair elections, and other essential aspects of democracy. He and his emotional wife spoke publicly against bourgeois injustices and luxury, while secretly amassing a private fortune. Finally, Perón was ousted in 1955, three years after the death of Evita, his greatest propagandist.

Like Perón a half-century before, Putin promised in 2000 to tame the unbridled capitalism that had run wild under his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin. He pledged to restore a sense of dignity to a country that had just lost its empire and suffered a severe economic contraction during the early years of the post-communist transition.

Putin renationalized, or rather brought under Kremlin control, the oil, gas, and other industries that had been privatized in the 1990's. Buoyed by high world energy prices, he was able to pay the back wages and pensions that Yeltsin's cash-strapped government still owed to miners, railroad workers, and teachers. As with Perón, citizens were bribed into backing the regime.

But, with oil and gas revenues flowing into state coffers, Putin started to fill his own pockets. His personal wealth – including palaces, yachts, watches, and cars – has been estimated at $40-70 billion. [ at this point we should stop reading; BTW she is still a professor at NY University ]

[Jan 16, 2014] Primakov uncovered efforts of Russia neoliberal fifth colum to sell the country

Vzglyad

Annual report on the meeting, "Mercury Club " by Yevgeny Primakov was devoted to harsh criticism of neoliberalism in Russia - mostly of its economic policy . "Especially acute is the problem of combatting the neoliberal policies in Russia", - said Primakov actually accusing neoliberals with sabotaging the Putin reforms. Academician enumerated the main efforts of the Kremlin during the last year directed on prevention of another round of neoliberal reforms in Russian economy -- the new privatization binge was postponed, the attempts of weakening and watering down of policy of social protection which was declared in May's presidential decrees were stopped.

...In fact, Primakov stated fundamental differences between the Kremlin and the White House - and as these differences are ideological, it is impossible to get rid of them by just agreeing on some of the median line, the general course. That is why Primakov's diagnosis can be regarded as an indictment of liberal course - the course that Medvedev's the government persistently persue...

He :

" Can I assume that in modern Russian market mechanisms by themselves without state participation are able to provide growth and balanced development of economics, and that a low level of competition is sufficient to achieve the technical and technological progress? Definitely not . Of course, this does not mean state domination of the economy should last forever. But it is necessary in certain historical periods, and I believe that today we are in that period. In addition, our neoliberals do not take into account the lessons of the crisis of 2008-2009. It is known that in the U.S. and in the EU during the crisis government's influence on the economy greatly increased. This trend continues . "

Putin's return to the Kremlin was not in the plans of the neoliberals - that's why Russian White revolution was undertaken before the lections. Unable to stop Putin's liberal part of the elite was forced to obey and to pretend that it will hold a new "illiberal" course Putin stated in his election papers. But in fact for more than one and a half years, the government is sabotaging Putin's reforms, in words agreeing with statist Putin's policy, but in reality trying to continue all the same liberal policy and even trying to "deepen and expand " on it.

Primakov said that

"Pushing for dramatic and immediate reduction of the state's role in the economy, our neoliberals attempted to launch a new large-scale privatization of state property; they, insist on the maximum inclusion into the privatization of major state-owned enterprises for the country," and recalled that in order to prevent privatization plans, in June last year it was necessary a special law " containing adjustments to government policy", essentially cutting privatization appetites short. This decision was not initiated from within the government. "

In other words the Kremlin forced the government to change its policy to prevent "the sale of the motherland." But it was a just a single, albeit a very important skirmish, while the whole ideology of the Medvedev's entourage about role of the government in the economy did not actually change

...

"Neo-liberals tend to emphasize the monopoly inherent in natural monopolies, but do not pay attention to the" "oligarchic" monopolies of private business, which, for example, through supermarkets push to higher prices for food and other goods. That's what one of the direct causes of inflation in Russia. Growth of municipal tariffs that exceed growth of inflation has also become a significant factor pushing inflation up, rising costs and leading to the loss of competitiveness of our producers ...

High and ever-increasing tariffs, not only hit population pockets, particularly pensioners and low-paid workers, but also are a major constraint on economic growth. Meanwhile, the neoliberal position was that the state refused to fix municipal tariffs, offloading this function the market mechanism. Opposition to this is the president's decision to bind tariff increase to the level of inflation. "

Primakov recalled and that Mededev's government tried to limit investment activities of state companies, despite the fact that "due to currect economic situation large, usually public companies, have more investment opportunities to play a major role in economic growth. Here we are speaking primarily about the implementation of mega-projects, which can and should spur economic growth. "

Indeed, all the major infrastructure projects that have been proposed in the last year came from the president, and not from Medvedev's government. It was Putin at the St. Petersburg Economic Forum last summer announced plans to channel funds from the Russian stability fund for the reconstruction of BAM and Trans-Siberian Railway, construction of a new Ring Road in Moscow and other major investment projects, and in December, said the priority development of Siberia and the Far East. Large scale industrialization is possible only on public funds - the West will not invest in our industry, and a large part of the domestic private sector will neither as they prefer to move capital offshore, despite the threats of Vladimir Putin. Indeed, why go back to their homeland, when their families and they themselves have long lived abroad? It is absurd to expect that the West will be invested in our roads and MIC (even forgetting about current Great Recession in the West) -- why they would strengthen a competitor?

... ... ...

Refusal of re-industrialization domestic neoliberals sometimes try to sell as a boon - it supposedly should allow Russia to enter directly into the post-industrial stage . Hence the "Skolkovo" as a replacement for their own aircraft industry . " Neoliberals , in fact, ignore the need to restore the destroyed in the 90s Russia industries , primarily manufacturing, - Primakov said . - Post-industrial society - it's not just high-tech and service industries. In the same post-industrial United States today there is a clear tendency to try to recover domestic manufacturing, previously off shored to developing countries . "

[Jan 16, 2014] Neoliberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"... it came to resemble more of a religion or culture than an economic theory." See also Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism

Philosophical neoliberalism

The definition of economic neoliberalism which has been presented focuses heavily on economic policies and has little to say about non-economic policy (other than that they should not be allowed to interfere with the running of the free market). A more extreme form of economic neoliberalism advocates the use of free market techniques outside of commerce and business, by the creation of new markets in health, education, energy and so on.[89]

This point of view takes the belief, that the only important freedoms are market freedoms, to its logical conclusion. In doing so, however, this took neoliberalism into a more philosophical direction where it came to resemble more of a religion or culture than an economic theory. As Paul Treanor explains:

As you would expect from a complete philosophy, neoliberalism has answers to stereotypical philosophical questions such as "Why are we here" and "What should I do?". We are here for the market, and you should compete. Neo-liberals tend to believe that humans exist for the market, and not the other way around: certainly in the sense that it is good to participate in the market, and that those who do not participate have failed in some way. In personal ethics, the general neoliberal vision is that every human being is an entrepreneur managing their [sic] own life, and should act as such. Moral philosophers call this is a virtue ethic, where human beings compare their actions to the way an ideal type would act – in this case the ideal entrepreneur. Individuals who choose their friends, hobbies, sports, and partners, to maximise their status with future employers, are ethically neoliberal. This attitude – not unusual among ambitious students – is unknown in any pre-existing moral philosophy, and is absent from early liberalism. Such social actions are not necessarily monetarised, but they represent an extension of the market principle into non-economic area of life – again typical for neoliberalism[89]

Corrupted neoliberalism

The rise of neoliberalism in the 1970s as a practical system of government saw it implemented in various forms across the world. In some cases, the result was not anything that could be identified as neoliberalism, often with catastrophic results for the poor. This has resulted in many on the left claiming that this is a deliberate goal of neoliberalism,[95] while those on the right defend the original goals of neoliberalism and insist otherwise, an argument that rages to this day, rendering this section highly controversial. This section attempts to provide an unbiased overview of this discussion, focusing on all the forms of neoliberalism that are not in any way neoliberal, but which have come to be associated with it, as well as the reasons for why this has happened.

One of the best and least controversial examples of "neoliberal" reform is in Russia, whose reforms in 1989 were justified under neoliberal economic policy but which lacked any of the basic features of a neoliberal state (e.g. the rule of law, free press) which could have justified the reforms.

General liberal failure

The least controversial aspect of neoliberalism has often been presented by modern economists critical of neoliberalism's role in the world economic system. Among these economists, the chief voices of dissent are Joseph Stiglitz[96] and Paul Krugman.

Both use arguments about market failure to justify their views on neoliberalism. They argue that when markets are imperfect (which is to say all markets everywhere to some degree), then they can fail and may not work as neoliberals predict, resulting in some form of crony capitalism. The two chief modes of failure are usually due to imperfect property rights and due to imperfect information and correspond directly to Friedrich Hayek's assertion that classical liberalism will not work without protection of the private sphere and the prevention of fraud and deception.

The failure of property rights means that individuals can't protect ownership of their resources and control what happens to them, or prevent others from taking them away. This usually stifles free enterprise and results in preferential treatment for those who can.

Crony capitalism

The most blatant form of crony capitalism is the creation of a liberal economic system in which only some people ("cronies") are permitted property rights by the government in return for support for the regime, allowing supporters of the regime to expropriate any capital held by opponents. This is a useful method of control which is usually seen in its purest form in countries with dictatorships, where the regime can create a liberal system of markets and government without ceding any control of either. Such reforms can also be used to add a sprinkling of liberal legitimacy for the regime and open the country to external capital.

This form is useful to explain neoliberal reforms in countries where either the will or ability to enforce property rights is lacking, such as the problems of post Soviet Russia, in which reformist politicians colluded with politically connected business people. In return for backing democratic free market reforms, these business figures could expropriate resources in a country where ownership was not clear and sporadically enforced, leading to the rise of the Russian oligarchs.

Corporatocracy

Some claim that neoliberalism is a form of corporatocracy, the rule of a country by and for the benefit of large corporations. Since large corporations tend to fulfil all the conditions of a wealthy entity, they accrue many of the same benefits over smaller businesses. In addition, multinational corporations enjoy the benefits of neoimperialism on the international stage and can also move their base of operations from a country if that country pursues policies that it deems to be unfriendly to business, a threat which they provoke governments to enact upon.

Although classical neoliberalism rests on the free flow of information, the neoliberal era has been marked by an unprecedented expansion of intellectual property and copyright, an expansion of libel laws to silence criticism (e.g. libel tourism) and expanding corporate secrecy (e.g. in the UK corporations used contract law to forbid discussion of salaries, thereby controlling labour costs), all of which came to be seen as a normal part of neoliberalism, but are wholly against its spirit.

Finally, the fact that many media outlets are themselves part of large corporations leads to a conflict of interest between those corporations and the public good.

Class project

Not all members of a society may have equal access to the law or to information, even when everyone is theoretically equal under the law, as in a liberal democracy. This is because access to the law and information is not free as liberals (such as Hayek) assume, but have associated costs. Therefore, in this context, it is sound to say that the wealthy have greater rights than the poor.

In some cases, the poor may have practically no rights at all if their income falls below the levels necessary to access the law and unbiased sources of information, while the very wealthy may have the ability to choose which rights and responsibilities they bear if they can move themselves and their property internationally, resulting in social stratification, also known as class. This tendency to create and strengthen class has resulted in some (most famously [64]) claiming that neoliberalism is a class project, designed to impose class on society through liberalism.

Globalization

In practise, less developing nations have less developed rights and institutions, resulting in greater risk for international lenders and businesses. This means that developing countries usually have less privileged access to international markets than developed countries. Because of this effect, international lenders are also more likely to invest in foreign companies (i.e. multinational corporations) inside a country, rather than in local businesses,[97] giving international firms an unfair competitive advantage.[98] Also, speculative flows of capital may enter the country during a boom and leave during a recession, deepening economic crises and destabilizing the economy.

Both of these problems imply that developing countries should have greater protections against international markets than developed ones and greater barriers to trade. Despite such problems, IMF policy in response to crises, which is supposed to be guided by neoliberal ideas such as the Washington Consensus, is to increase liberalization of the economy and decrease barriers, allowing bigger capital flight and the chance for foreign firms to shore up their monopolies. Additionally, the IMF acts to increase moral hazard, since international involvement will usually result in an international bailout with foreign creditors being treated preferentially, leading international firms to discount the risks of doing business in less developed countries[99] and forcing the government to pay for them instead.

The view of some that international involvement and the imposition of "neoliberal" policies usually serves to make things worse and acts against the interests of the country being "saved", has led some to argue that the policies have nothing to do with any form of liberalism, but hide some other purpose. The most common assertion given by opponents is that they are a form of neocolonialism, where the more developed countries can exploit the less developed countries. However, even opponents do not agree. For example, Stiglitz assumes that there is no neoimperial plot, but that the system is driven by a mixture of ideology and special interests, in which neoliberal fundamentalists, who do not believe that neoliberalism can fail, work with financial and other multinational corporations, who have the most to benefit from opening up foreign markets. David Harvey, on the other hand, argues that local elites exploit neoliberal reforms in order to impose reforms that benefit them at the cost of the poor, while transferring the blame onto the "evil imperialist" developed countries,[64] citing the example of Argentina in 2001.

Policy implications

Neoliberalism seeks to transfer control of the economy from public to the private sector,[100] under the belief that it will produce a more efficient government and improve the economic health of the nation.[101] The definitive statement of the concrete policies advocated by neoliberalism is often taken to be [102] The Washington Consensus is a list of policy proposals that appeared to have gained consensus approval among the Washington-based international economic organizations (like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank).[103] Williamson's list included ten points:

[Jan 16, 2014] Ukraine's Protests Not (Yet) a Revolution by Matthew Rojansky

Nice example of complete detachment from reality in the name of political correctness... Radicalization of Svoboda and alliance of West with this neofascist party is conveniently ignored... And if "millions of Ukrainians have family, social or business ties with Russia, and follow Russian-language media." opposite is also true and that means that Russia has huge stake in Ukraine political affiliations. Coup d'état of "Galician nationalists" is definitely not in Russian interests...
Dec 12, 2013 | Wilson Center
In the three weeks since Ukraine formally suspended talks aimed at signing an Association Agreement with the European Union, two important facts have become clear.

Though these two basic dynamics may appear to confirm the cliché of Ukraine "caught between East and West," Ukrainians themselves do not see it this way.

Yanukovich, despite the intensity of Russian pressure, did not walk away from the EU table just to please Moscow. On the contrary, his relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin are devoid of any foundation of trust or even mutual respect, Yanukovich can be all but certain that the Kremlin will throw considerable resources behind a challenger in the 2015 Ukrainian presidential elections, if not sooner.

Moreover, Ukraine is not on track to join Russia's alternative to the EU, the Eurasian Economic Union. That would at best fuel a brief spurt of economic growth at the cost of longer term stagnation.

Meanwhile, the pro-European demonstrations have spread beyond Kiev - including to majority Russian-speaking cities in the industrial East, such as Kharkiv, Chernihev and Dniepropetrovsk. Very few protestors, save a few ultra-nationalists, would define their aspirations as being anti-Russian - for the simple reason that tens of millions of Ukrainians have family, social or business ties with Russia, and follow Russian-language media.

This commentary first appeared on Reuters's The Great Debate.

[Jan 16, 2014] Putin's Judicial Vertical Russian Rule of Law Takes a Step Backward By William Pomeranz, Matthew Rojansky

It's interesting how authors contradict themselves. And "corruption meme" as a neoliberal way to open countries to foreign capital after 2008 sounds almost like bad joke. Researchers, my %^&.

Some compliments first

The fact that Russia has managed to introduce a viable civil law system in just 20 years represents a significant accomplishment that would land at the top of any list of positive Russian legal reforms, if not for recent events. Like in other civil law countries, Russia's judicial branch consists of several specialized courts: a constitutional court, the courts of general jurisdiction for criminal and civil actions and a commercial (arbitrazh) court that deals with business-related controversies and disputes between enterprises and the state.

In many ways, the commercial courts have represented the very best of the post-Soviet legal system. Highly qualified judges preside over complex commercial disputes that regularly involve foreign litigants. The commercial court system possesses its own distinct rules of procedure, expeditiously handles major cases, publishes all decisions on its website and otherwise has introduced levels of transparency that are unmatched by any other part of the Russian judiciary. The commercial courts also have proved to be much less compliant than the courts of general jurisdiction, regularly ruling against the Russian state in tax and other matters.

And now it's time to stress the party line ;-)

For the United States, frustration with Russia's failure to prosecute corrupt officials and protect foreign investors, whistleblowers and minorities drove the passage in 2012 of the Justice for Sergei Magnitsky Act, which imposes financial and travel sanctions on security officials accused of human rights abuses.

Although Russia is grouped with some of the worst offenders in the assessments of international rights watchdogs-Freedom House puts it in the same "not free" category as North Korea, Iran and Cuba -a far bigger problem for the Kremlin is the perception that Russia is moving in the wrong direction relative to the rest of Europe and even many former Soviet states. In almost any argument about whether Putin has been a success or a failure, his defenders point to the objective improvements in quality of life, economic freedom, freedom to travel and security that Russians have enjoyed since Putin took office. For most of the past decade, these arguments were persuasive not only to a majority of Russians, but to the population of neighboring countries in Russia's "near abroad" and to the wider developing world. As Russia's economic growth slows to a near halt thanks largely to corruption, and as stories about the narrowing of public space and civil liberties in Russia proliferate, the Kremlin's ability to secure desirable outcomes abroad will decline precipitously.

[Jan 16, 2014] Fall Vestnik Interview with Matthew Rojansky (Issue #24) Wilson Center

Wilson Center

Second, show humility and be conscious of difficult history. This can be very difficult to do, especially for politicians who are used to focusing only on the problem of this moment and what to do in the next day or week. Not only gestures but deep feelings of respect and humility toward the other side, particularly toward those who feel they have been wronged, are essential to create the conditions for reconciliation. The US-Russia relationship is still badly in need of such sentiments, not only because of the Cold War but because of the 1990's and 2000's, when many Russians have felt ignored, manipulated, or demonized by the West, the United States first and foremost.

Finally, invest in institutions and individuals. The costs of Western outreach to the former communist states of Eastern Europe, including the former Soviet states, can be counted in the billions of today's dollars. But the rewards have been incalculably more valuable. Today, the most troubling trend is the disappearance of American interest in and commitment to engagement with the region. The U.S., even in a time of fiscal tightening, must put real resources into institutions and channels that connect people and keep the doors open between East and West.

...I understand very well why many people perceive the political and economic systems that were developed largely by the United States and other Western powers after World War II to be in crisis. It is true that the United States' political system has become structurally and practically incapable of delivering resolutions to the most pressing national problems we face today: health and welfare for people, real national security with preservation of our civic freedoms, a positive role and image for America in the world, and a stable long-term solution to our debt addiction, to name just a few of these problems. Europe has a different but still urgent set of problems, that are both structural and issue-specific. And the old age and relative inflexibility of the basic institutions of global economic and political governance forged in the 1940's are certainly a big part of the problem too.

[Jan 15, 2014] 'The rainbow belongs to God' Anti-gay US pastor sets sights on Sochi Olympics - U.S. News

When President Vladimir Putin recently banned "homosexual propaganda" in Russia, he joined sides in a new global culture war: a struggle to stop the march of gay rights abroad even as advocates wave rainbow flags in America. Now, as the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics approach, both sides are bracing for unrest - and an American pastor is taking credit for the law that started it all.

Scott Lively is a hero to some, a demon to others and a joke to still more. From his home in Springfield, Mass., he runs Abiding Truth Ministries, a church dedicated to combating "the homosexual agenda," and Holy Grounds Coffee Shop, where the faithful gather for java and Jesus. Lively also sermonizes overseas, promoting his books - most notably The Pink Swastika, which traces the Nazi Party to a gay bar - and portraying gay love as a "dark force" in human history responsible for the Inquisition, American slavery and the Holocaust.

...Last week, Lively suggested Russian officials foil gay activists planning to rainbow-bomb the Olympics by flying a rainbow banner over the games so "the global homosexual movement" would be reminded that "the rainbow belongs to God!"

'Gay Rights' is Trojan Horse for Totalitarianism - Victoria Jackson

Brilliant observation by WND's David Kupelian – The 'gay rights' movement is a trojan horse for totalitarianism. He explores this in the October issue of Whistleblower available here. A "Trojan Horse" is "any trick or stratagem that causes a target to invite a foe into a securely protected bastion or space." (Wiki)

WND Story here.

David Kupelian says, "this particular issue – this revolutionary sexual anarchy movement, which more than any other ideology, including Marxism, Islam or atheism, has the potential of permanently corrupting our nation's core 'operating system' called the family – is the one issue that almost everybody is afraid to confront."

Breitbart told me, "There is no 'gay agenda'. There is a Marxist agenda and they are using the "victimization of gays" movement to achieve their ends. Gays aren't victims."

I think everyone has an agenda. Homosexuals want their lifestyle validated. Marxists want to replace America's free enterprise system with a totalitarian utopia. Globalists want a one world government ruled by an elite few. Islam wants the world controlled by Sharia Law. Christians are commanded to spread the gospel throughout the world, "to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." Secular Humanists are looking out for number one.

Kupelian writes, "When it (The Sexual Revolution) started, who could possibly have known it would turn out like this?

After all, it emerged right after the historic '60s Civil Rights movement, which nobly outlawed racial segregation in America. And in the warm glow of the Martin Luther King era, many people came to believe "gays" were simply the next group needing protection from discrimination.

Of course, being an overwhelmingly Christian nation meant millions of Americans strongly objected to homosexuality on moral and religious grounds. But Americans are also the most pluralistic, tolerant and open-minded people on earth, and were increasingly inclined to give "gay rights" activists the benefit of the doubt.

Eventually warming up to a growing "gay-friendly" culture (promoted at every turn by the news and entertainment media), Americans abandoned their previous caution, flung their doors wide open and heartily welcomed the "gay rights" agenda with open arms.

However, it was a Trojan Horse. And most people had no idea what lay in waiting."

Kupelian lists current evidence of 'gay-rights-caused' totalitarianism:

  1. legislation that flat out prohibits counseling help for minors who want to overcome unwanted same-sex attractions
  2. the prosecution and criminalization of ever-larger numbers of Christian businesspeople for simply declining to promote homosexuality on moral and religious grounds
  3. the new California law decreeing that boys must be allowed to use girls' restrooms and locker rooms if they identify with the opposite sex, and vice versa
  4. forced integration of open homosexuals into the military
  5. the imposition on the nation of homosexual marriage.

But, Kupelian warns "those are just the issues that have made it into the news cycle. The bigger story – what's going on behind the scenes, and what's coming down the tracks – is even more troubling."

Highlights of Whistleblower's October issue titled "THE NEW SEXUAL REVOLUTION" include:

[Jan 15, 2014] Review Whose World Is It Anyway The National Interest

That's what neoliberal globalization is doing so effectively, the corruption of local elites: "Wise hegemons took care to ensure that they educated the elites of subordinate states in their substantive beliefs. In doing so, these elites would learn to accept the ideas that animate the hegemonic power. "

Charles Kupchan, No One's World: The West, the Rising Rest, and the Coming Global Turn (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 272 pp., $27.95.

IN 1990, G. John Ikenberry and Charles Kupchan published a research article on hegemonic power in International Organization that originally garnered little notice but proved to be much beloved by scholars. In "Socialization and Hegemonic Power," Ikenberry and Kupchan argued that hegemons maintained their status through more than brute force or the manipulation of carrots and sticks. Wise hegemons took care to ensure that they educated the elites of subordinate states in their substantive beliefs. In doing so, these elites would learn to accept the ideas that animate the hegemonic power.

[Jan 15, 2014] Give Corruption a Chance

The National Interest

CORRUPTION, MORE often than not, seems to resemble a plague. Afghanistan, where the CIA and British intelligence (in competition with the Iranians) have quite literally been handing over duffel bags stuffed full with taxpayer money to President Hamid Karzai and his associates, is perhaps the most prominent example of its invasiveness and hardiness. Nothing seems to be able to eradicate it. Immunization efforts fail. Mutations occur. The only course seems to be to attempt to adapt to it. For despite the efforts expended by several American presidents on behalf of Karzai's administration, the United States has no surer way of ensuring influence and access to Karzai and his advisers than through direct cash payments into a slush fund designed to purchase the loyalty of important and powerful personages within the Afghan government.

The bankruptcy of the Western strategy in Afghanistan could hardly be expressed in more vivid terms. Such failures in Afghanistan, not to mention Iraq, have occurred while the broader (and noncoercive) dimensions of "state building" or more generally "development" have also paid less-than-stellar returns.

It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the project of implanting "good" institutions in non-Western societies, whether through conquest (as in Iraq and Afghanistan) or through consensual, noncoercive means (as in Cambodia), has turned out to be a thankless task.

[Jan 15, 2014] Gay Rights as Foreign Policy

The National Interest Blog

A second point. With widespread support for gay rights having arisen in America only in the last few years, it would be strange for us to claim moral authority over other states. Our own president, after all, opposed gay marriage until 2012, and his multiyear "evolution" on the issue reeked of political opportunism. Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) with strong bipartisan support in 1996; our executive branch defended its lawfulness until 2011; and it was only put out of action-by a 5-4 split decision in the Supreme Court, not by a vote in Congress-in June of this year. And this law had real and severe effects on gay Americans-for example, on the binational couple in this video. One of the panelists, former Human Rights Campaign head Elizabeth Birch, even said that "we had a law...that was as horrible as any law you can ever imagine short of having to kill gay people for being gay...it said you people, because of who you are, will get no federal benefits.... Technically Russia, up until we got rid of DOMA, was better than us on the books. So I don't think we should have a tremendous amount of arrogance about how we treat our gay people."

...Should it also ask other countries to adopt our culture-indeed, a feature of our culture that very large numbers of Americans (myself not included) still oppose?

...Kirchick and Simonyi suggest that the Russian elite longs to be seen as Western, as civilized, and that they can accordingly be pushed toward the West's new position on gay rights. Yet opposition to gay rights permeates Russian society-even if the elite moves, much work will remain. And the United States cannot push Russia in a vacuum, with no consequences. There will inevitably be backlash if a country widely perceived as a rival attempts to tell Russia that its values are wrong. Some of the backlash will be legal. Russia responded to the Magnitsky Law by banning adoptions of Russian children by U.S. citizens. European countries that have considered Magnitsky-like measures have been threatened with a similar ban

...But it is the alleged geostrategic element of gay rights where Kirchick and Simonyi's proposal threatens the most severe backlash. As Kirchick pointed out, pro-Russian forces in places like the Ukraine have publicly promoted the notion that associating with Europe will lead to gay marriage. Kirchick suggests that this is a deliberate move by Putin and Russia, and that because Putin has made gay rights a geostrategic issue, we must as well. Yet this would mean fighting Putin on ground where he clearly thinks he has the advantage. And it would confirm nationalist narratives that the decadent West wishes to impose its values on the Slavic world. To paraphrase Lenin, we would be heightening the contradictions between East and West. Those who favor friendly relations with the West but who hold traditional attitudes about sexuality might be driven away. It's hard to see how all this is good for America's interests-or for Russia's gays.

[Jan 14, 2014] How Quickly Will the Latest Arms Race Accelerate?

intnsred

Reality interferes... (3, Insightful)

Perhaps. Perhaps not.

The reality is that the US and west never stopped waging the Cold War. We broke the understanding with Russia and pushed NATO eastward, even incorporating parts of the former USSR into NATO.

Then we tore up the ABM treaty and put anti-missile bases in Eastern Europe claiming we were doing that because of Iran. The Russians didn't find that laughable claim one bit funny and understood that the west was seeking to negate their nuclear deterrence.

NATO has been used offensively both inside and outside of Europe and shows that it has nothing to do with "defense".

We portrayed a rag-tag group of Muslim fundamentalists as some sort of existential threat to the US and west, but now the US gov't has made a "pivot" and is portraying China as militarily aggressive because they are squabbling over some worthless islets with their neighbors. It's clear that China is the focus of a new Cold War.

It's clear the US is in search of a "new enemy" because that's what keeps Americans distracted from how much we waste on our military and our continuing economic decline.

"Were the Soviet Union to sink tomorrow under the waters of the ocean, the American military-industrial establishment would have to go on, substantially unchanged, until some other adversary could be invented. Anything else would be an unacceptable shock to the American economy."

-- Ambassador to the USSR and US State Dept. strategist George F. Kennan.

intnsred

Re:Reality interferes... (1)

However it is also true that every nation which entered NATO practically begged for it.

I think it's important to remember some of the skulduggery that we did in Europe -- for decades. Remember, we essentially bought elections in France and Italy in the late 40s to prevent communists from being elected into power; we beamed divisive ethnic propaganda into Yugoslavia for decades. Hell, even as late as the 1980s we had our CIA work with European rightists to conduct flat-out terrorist actions against our own NATO allies in a strategy of tension designed to push western European gov'ts to the political right.

Given the fact that many of the new leaders of the former Warsaw Pact we funded and backed for years and years, and in such an atmosphere of such skulduggery, it's not surprising that they'd want to snuggle up to the west if only to increase the odds that they would not continue to remain a target.

After all, it's not like the vast majority of the common people of those countries had a lot of say in the economic shock therapy that was inflicted on their nations, nor in whether they should become a member of NATO or not.

[Jan 12, 2014] U.S. relations with Russia face critical tests in 2014 as Putin, Obama fail to fulfill expectations

Level of comments in WP is much lower that in any British newspaper, even such as FP and Times :-(. Comments that reflect the reality are pretty rare...

"But," Lukyanov said, "there's no way to have a long-term, interest-based relationship. Americans are too self-centric."

Victor Moscow
Despite all the declaration about the reset of the Russian-American relations it will be only wording and empty issues because the USA considers Russia as a permanent foe. Gorbachev who is so highly appreciated in the West is considered here to be a traitor who allowed Reagan and Kohl deceive him. They both promised not to expand NATO to the East, and our chatterbox believed them or did it intentionally without any formalization of this topic.
There is no Warsaw Pact countries, NATO is next to the Russian border, all former Soviet vassals are barkin on Russia - these are the achievements of Gorbi and his counterpart - Yeltsin. This Soviet Man of the Year in the Time magazine should be sued for his sins in the face of Russia.

xzuma

Wow, another bs coming out of Washington narrative. As if there is no Syria cooperation (Russian warships guarding delivery of chemical weapons to norwegian ship, carrying american equipment), returning back to Geneva talks on Syria, a breakthrough on Iran. Russia giving the US people a big favor by providing a safe place for Snowden. Or wait, of course the USG would like to have another war in Syria and Iran, and keep spying on US people, so yeah, "Putin does not fulfill the expectations".
wanderer3764
"Events in Russia finally took control of the agenda. In December 2011, a rigged election brought out tens of thousands of demonstrators and prompted a scolding from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton."

Its an odd form of election-rigging that has the winner winning by *less* than the percentage indicated by the pre-election polling. But then, flagrant lies like this are central to the Anglosphere media approach to its Russia coverage, so what can one expect.

"U.S. officials were interviewed for this article on the condition of anonymity in order to speak frankly about the meager gains of the administration's approach to Russia. "

And as usual in DC, they lie. Recall when Pakistan closed its territory to the transit of US personnel and supplies to Afghanistan in 2011-2012? Russian railroads and airspace filled the gap. Our whole war effort in Afghanistan would have collapsed if the Russian government hadn't helped.

Now, can you point to anything of remotely equal magnitude that Russia gained from the 'Reset'? No you can't. As usual, the US demands things of the Russian government, and reciprocates nothing. And this is why the 'Reset' failed. Putin just isn't in the business of givinc concessions without reciprocity. No wonder the Anglosphere Foreign Policy Elite & Punditocracy hate him so!

magnifco1000
Putin knows US Foreign Policy is loaded with hypocrisy and insincerity. Take China, US corporations flock to her to use the cheap, no rights, slave and child labor. Plus the US owes her a trillion dollars. So, most all US criticism of China is muted and held in check.

But, the US is ready and willing to rip Russia. Don't kid yourself, US foreign policy is first motivated by money, ahead of everything else.

kabscorner

Always more than one side to every issue. Neither Russia, China, or the US is always right. And, each nation has to do what is best for their interest. Given our huge debt and the fact that the American public is sick and tired of perpetual war, our leaders must learn how to get along with others. It's a big world and there is plenty of room for two or more superpowers. In fact, it may be a good thing to have more than one superpower throwing its weight around the world.

[Jan 05, 2014] Revenge to Russia by Igor Karaulov

Izvestia.ru

Reflecting on the recent bombings in Volgograd, inquisitive observers note that it is a strange terror . Alleged terrorists should make demands, should produce manifestos, to put on the Internet the last words of suicide bombers, etc. If there are no demands to existing power, why to call the blast a terror act ?

And really the whole idea is that the terrorist backers should use this horrible " Minute of Fame " to express their crazy ideas ? While he was alive, Osama bin Laden regularly produced speeches and messages, sometime in sync sometimes not with his the actual deeds and plans his followers. Recent bandits from "Al-Shabab " in Nairobi accompanied their mall hostage taking with appeals in Twitter. A blond neo-Nazi Breivik wrote a voluminous treatise in general , before he even started to act.

None of this was observed during the Russian terrorist attacks in recent years. Explosion, shock , mourning - and further silence. Not half a word about what is actually want these people - or rather , unpeople.

What is the reason ?

May it makes sense to listen to those who explains this oddity in conspiratorial spirit, saying that intelligence agencies plot something dark or "government hides" the information?

But it seems to me that it's easier to admit the obvious: terrorism in Russia has changed. Terror of times of Basayev is different from the recent explosions. In the latter case is not clear who did it - whether "women of Caucasian nationality" , or "men of Slavic appearance " which is two very different things .

Yes, in Basayev's time there were concrete demands such as the withdrawal of troops, and independence of Ichkeria. But all hopes were shattered in Beslan. Bitter price was paid for a clear message from power that be: blackmail will not work, the principle of territorial integrity is invaluable . And since that there was a sudden the cut : no hostage-taking, but from time to time ruthless anonymous explosions.

After Beslan there was no any sane political goals for the Wahhabi terrorists. they has nothing to fight for. There was only revenge for the lost war , only hatred. But hatred is abundant both within the Caucasus , and outside Islam. Someone hates the country , someone hates the government, someone hates the world and people in general. Historically, in the Caucasus these are more plentiful, and radical Islam is proven organizational and ideological machine to organize them. People infected with hatred, know where to go . This is how " Russian Wahhabi " emerged and their role in the underground seems to be constantly growing. Terror is gradually separated from their tribal bases, acquires a universal meaning.

In the absence of large-scale goals the terror machine sooner or later had to switch to commercial orders . Caucasian underground has a proven know-how as for preparing suicide bombers, " black widows ", and is a product that some are willing to pay for. Both within the country and in the outside world. Different suicide bombers for each specific order. And orders might come plentiful or not at all: feast or famine.

Volgograd events leave no doubt: there was a serious and well financed order to disrupt the Olympics. OK, if not to disrupt, then at least to poison the events. Christmas explosions are like the overture.

So do not expect any demands. they are intend to extort anything from Russia. They want a revenge, and revenge is not for Russia Caucasian policy and is not in related to Islam. They try to avenge quite a different Russia deeds. To avenge the fact that Russia very badly behaved from their point of view the last year. That it is at least three times cross the plans of the sole world superpower and its assorted allies. They want to avenge that Russia deflected military threat from Syria. Russia has not extradited and instead sheltered Snowden . That Russia does not want to comply with plans of EU to absorb Ukraine. Therefore, the current aggravation of terror is not a revenge of "black widows " and Wahhabi leaders, hiding in the mountains. Our homegrown "Jamaat " play here no more than a secondary role .

Actually enemies of the Sochi Olympics have found themselves in a very embarrassing situation. Especially foreign leaders who wanted to punish Russia with their refusal to come to Sochi (as if games are organized not for athletes, but for those pot-bellied Uncles ). The same with domestic Liberasts, who advocated a boycott of the Olympics, signed various petitions, rejoiced every road washed out, each of awkwardness with the Olympic torch. They can't be called even an accomplices. They are worse: the terrorists last reserves, an ambush regiment of terrorists squads.

It seems that these people can't understand in what company they got. For example, Alfred Koch rather playfully responded to Volgograd events: "The Olympics is sweeping the country. And really this is a fire and those people are also torchbearers." Oh, I do not know what should be done to force such junk to put aside their specific sense of humor.

I do not believe that for a true patriot Russia there should be no issues with this Olympics and as for the costs of the event. True, the preparations for it began in a much better economic conditions and therefore become far more onerous for the budget than expected.

But the campaign against the Olympics now, when everything is ready for it - means openly invite into the country people willing to pay for the horror (so translated from the Latin word terror). You can argue about whether to help in the fight against the underground new laws, or should we learn from Israel or other countries under attack, but it seems indisputable that the unity of the society on important issues could help to deflect from out territory at least some of the sponsors of the international terrorism.

Read more : http://izvestia.ru/news/563519

[Jan 05, 2014] The Volgograd Attacks Taking the Long View by Nikolas K. Gvosdev

Jan 04, 2014 | The National Interest

The second question is whether the Volgograd attacks will impact Russian foreign policy. In the wake of the bombings, many people recalled the reported leaked comments of Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar to Putin during his summer 2013 visit to Moscow, that if Russia accommodated Saudi preferences on Syria by abandoning its support of the Bashar al-Assad government, the Saudis would use their influence with Chechen and other jihadi groups to guarantee the security of the Sochi Games. Whether this was an accurate description of the actual conversation or not, there remains a widespread belief in the Russian foreign policy community that Saudi Arabia actively supports Salafist groups who target Russian interests. Nevertheless, Russia and Saudi Arabia have continued their conversations about the future of the Middle East, talks fueled, in part, by Saudi concerns about the unreliability of the Obama administration's guarantees and public statements. Even when profoundly disagreeing with Russian policy, the Saudis have recognized that Moscow consistently acts in accordance with its statements. Putin and Bandar held a follow-on meeting in early December to discuss both the Syrian civil war and the Iranian nuclear program. According to reports, the Saudi and Russian sides narrowed some of their differences on these issues (for instance, both apparently accept that there can only be a political solution to the crisis in Syria that comes about through a negotiated process) but significant gaps remain between Riyadh's position and Moscow's. Nevertheless, Saudi Arabia, in seeking to diversify its strategic relationships, seems open to working more constructively with Russia.

Nina L. Khrushcheva examines the affinities between Russia's leader and Argentina's post-war strongman

When a regular "Anglo-American operative" spread disinformation that looks less offensive then a relative of Soviet dictator does the same.
Project Syndicate

Putin the Perónist

Russian President Vladimir Putin has been compared to many strongmen of the past – Joseph Stalin, Leonid Brezhnev, and Chile's Augusto Pinochet, to name a few. But, after nearly 14 years in power, perhaps the best comparison now may be a transgender cross between the former Argentine leader Juan Perón and his legendary wife, Eva ("Evita").

In the early 1940's, Colonel Perón, as Minister of Labor and Secretary of War, was a "gray cardinal" to Argentina's rulers. Before communism collapsed in 1989, Colonel Putin, also memorably gray, was a devoted KGB operative, entrusted with spreading disinformation and recruiting Soviet and foreign agents in East Germany. [ that's a dangerous simplification --NNB]

At the labor ministry, Perón initiated social reforms, including welfare benefits for the poor. Although his motivation, at least in part, may have been a desire for social justice, Perón was, in effect, bribing the beneficiaries to support his own rise to power and wealth. With his beautiful and outspoken wife – a "woman of the people" – at his side, Perón was able to persuade voters in 1946 that, as President, he would fundamentally change the country.

He was as good as his word. Perón's government nationalized banks and railroads, increased the minimum wage and improved living standards, reduced the national debt (for a while at least), and revived the economy. Argentina became less reliant on foreign trade, though the move toward autarky eventually undermined growth, causing the country to lose its position among the world's richest.

During this period, Perón also undermined freedom of speech, fair elections, and other essential aspects of democracy. He and his emotional wife spoke publicly against bourgeois injustices and luxury, while secretly amassing a private fortune. Finally, Perón was ousted in 1955, three years after the death of Evita, his greatest propagandist.

Like Perón a half-century before, Putin promised in 2000 to tame the unbridled capitalism that had run wild under his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin. He pledged to restore a sense of dignity to a country that had just lost its empire and suffered a severe economic contraction during the early years of the post-communist transition.

Putin renationalized, or rather brought under Kremlin control, the oil, gas, and other industries that had been privatized in the 1990's. Buoyed by high world energy prices, he was able to pay the back wages and pensions that Yeltsin's cash-strapped government still owed to miners, railroad workers, and teachers. As with Perón, citizens were bribed into backing the regime.

But, with oil and gas revenues flowing into state coffers, Putin started to fill his own pockets. His personal wealth – including palaces, yachts, watches, and cars – has been estimated at $40-70 billion. [ at this point we should stop reading; BTW she is still a professor at NY University ]

[Jan 02, 2014] Beyond the Russian Reset by Samuel Charap

A light-weight article with some good points. The missing part is that the USA is an empire which has its own logic that dictates certain foreign policy. And no US administration can change this logic.
June 25, 2013 | The National Interest

The geopolitical gamesmanship following the "color revolutions" in Georgia and Ukraine that culminated in the NATO Bucharest Summit Declaration is probably the most significant case in point. That document, a product of direct negotiations among heads of state, declared unequivocally that Ukraine and Georgia "will become" NATO members. It's easy to see how Moscow read that as reflecting NATO's intent to impose membership on Russia's neighbors, regardless of their preparedness for membership or their populations' support for it.

... ... ...

Although his relationship with President George W. Bush, especially after 9/11, demonstrates that he is not ideologically opposed to U.S.-Russian cooperation, Putin is clearly fed up with certain aspects of U.S. foreign policy, such as what he perceives as meddling in Russian domestic politics and a U.S. habit of toppling sitting governments that disagree with it. And he has signaled his frustration to Washington in no uncertain terms, through recent actions such as the ban on U.S. adoptions of Russian children in retaliation for the Magnitsky legislation enacted by the U.S. Congress late last year. He further worsened the atmosphere in bilateral relations by imposing additional restrictions on Americans working in Russian NGOs ...

... ... ...

DESPITE THE recent downturn, bilateral ties are still a far cry from their near-hostile state in 2008, following the August conflict in Georgia. According to accounts that first appeared in Ronald Asmus's 2010 book A Little War That Shook the World: Georgia, Russia, and the Future of the West, the U.S. National Security Council's "principals committee"-which includes the president, vice president and other senior national-security officials-considered the use of military force to prevent Russia from continuing its assault on Georgia. Officials discussed (but ultimately rejected) the option of bombing the tunnel used by Russia to move troops into South Ossetia, as well as other "surgical strikes." The fact that officials at the highest levels of decision making in the U.S. government even discussed military action against the world's only other nuclear superpower is profoundly disturbing.

.... .... ...

But one should be wary of any list of shared interests in an analysis of U.S.-Russian relations. Even when both governments openly declare commonality of goals on an issue, results can be elusive. The most vivid case in point is the U.S.-Russian Strategic Framework Declaration, also known as the Sochi Declaration, signed by Presidents Putin and Bush in April 2008. That document described a long agenda of issues on which the two countries' interests converge. It also declared in striking language that both countries had definitively recognized that bilateral disagreements were far outweighed by common interests. The first paragraph declared:

We reject the zero-sum thinking of the Cold War when "what was good for Russia was bad for America" and vice versa. Rather, we are dedicated to working together and with other nations to address the global challenges of the 21st century, moving the U.S.-Russia relationship from one of strategic competition to strategic partnership. We intend to cooperate as partners to promote security, and to jointly counter the threats to peace we face, including international terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. We are determined to build a lasting peace, both on a bilateral basis and in international fora, recognizing our shared responsibility to the people of our countries and the global community of nations to remain steadfast and united in pursuit of international security, and a peaceful, free world. Where we have differences, we will work to resolve them in a spirit of mutual respect.

Some critics of the Obama administration have pointed to that document to make the case that the reset was nothing new. But that argument turns the real lesson of the Sochi Declaration on its head. The fact that only four months after it was signed the United States contemplated an attack on Russian forces in Georgia demonstrates that the document amounted to mere words on paper.

[Jan 02, 2014] Suicide bomber kills at least 15 at Russian train station Europe By SERGEI L. LOIKO

McClatchy DC

Volgograd is close to the troubled Caucasus region, where Chechen rebel leader Doku Umarov has vowed to use "maximum force" to prevent Russia from staging the Winter Olympics, which he called "satanic games held on the bones of our ancestors."

Security appears to be a major concern of the Olympic organizers.

Arnold Lockshin

"It becomes clear that there are political and geopolitical interests behind the scenes that are actively working to destabilize Russia, with violence as their most potent weapon. The attacks are not simply isolated terrorist actions, but rather, cynically orchestrated events carried out by well-connected criminal networks whose goal is to foment conflict and carry out the agenda of the US intelligence establishment in its subversion of Russia...
"It is the association of these individuals and organizations with the US State Department and US intelligence that makes them particularly insidious. One such entity that bears scrutiny is the American Committee for Peace in the Caucasus (ACPC), previously known as the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya... This intimate relationship between the ACPC and the US State Department indicates not merely a confluence of interests, but rather a direct relationship wherein the former is an organ of the latter...
"As every covert attempt at subversion through the use of "soft power" has failed, the Western imperialists now activate their terror networks in the Caucasus to do by force what their intelligence networks failed to do by stealth: destabilize Russia." (Eric Draitser, "Barbarians at the Gate: Terrorism, the US, and the Subversion of Russia." StopImperialism.com August 22, 2012).

[Jan 01, 2014] Underground Islam by Simon Shuster

A pretty typical exercise in hypocrisy from one of the "pocket" journalists. I especially like his touching concerns about Salafist islam, which is close to Wahhabism, its militant arm and id "exported" version of Islam for the Russian territory. See Defeating Salafism and Wahhabism the Right way
Slate

To the American ear, this may sound like the kind of bigotry that would force a politician to resign, or at least apologize for "misspeaking." But American ears are tuned to a different wavelength, one where the word tolerance (tolerantnost) does not make people cringe the way it does in Russia. Russia never had a civil rights movement. It had 200 years of sporadic warfare with the Muslims of the North Caucasus, a strip of highlands it conquered in the 19th century and still fights wars to control, most recently in Chechnya in the 1990s. These wars play out today through a full-scale insurgency in the North Caucasus as well as terrorist attacks across Russia; the most recent one in Moscow-a suicide bombing at Domodedovo Airport in 2011-killed at least 37 people and was traced back to Dagestan. Combine that with cultural irritants like the rams of Kurban Bayram and it should not be surprising that distrust, if not outright hatred, of Muslims tends to be the default position among Muscovites. (Russians sometimes call this bytovoy racism, meaning racism that is "commonplace" or "household," a qualifier that makes it seem almost quaint.)

So the mayor's public position on mosques is as much a product of populism as it is small-mindedness. The mayor has an election coming up in September, and his closest rival, the opposition leader Alexei Navalny, has also made strident remarks about the need to stem Moscow's Islamization. Both of them realize that the Moscow electorate does not want any more mosques in their city; many of them do not even want to live in the same city as practicing Muslims. My Russian friends often argue with me about this, and I have found that all of them-even feminists, yuppies, political activists, leftie journalists-tend to sound like Bible Belt conservatives when the topic turns to Islam. (One common complaint concerns the dancing of lezginka, the traditional dance of the Caucasus, on Red Square. Muslim kids like to do this sometimes, not just for fun but to express the fact that their culture is also part of this multiethnic city and its heritage. It drives the Russians absolutely mad.)

The problem, of course, is that Moscow's Muslims have no safe enclave, nowhere to retreat. And as long as they have to come to their nation's capital to find work or to study, Muslims-and especially Salafis-will be forced to practice their religion at underground mosques. These are usually called "prayer rooms," and although no official count is possible there are estimated to be hundreds of them around the city. More radical interpretations of Islam are common there, and a lot of them lean toward Salafism, which is effectively banned in Russia. Down in the North Caucasus, a few Salafi mosques have been allowed, mostly to ease the surveillance efforts of the Russian security services, who find it convenient to have Salafis congregate in places where they can be easily watched. (Not that this surveillance always prevents terrorism: The biggest Salafi mosque in Russia is on Kotrova Street in Makhachkala, the capital of Dagestan. That is where Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the suspected bomber of the Boston Marathon, went for services last year, when he spent six months in Dagestan visiting family and meeting with local Islamists.)

Recommended Links

Google matched content

Softpanorama Recommended

Top articles

Sites

...



Etc

Society

Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

Quotes

War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotesSomerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose BierceBernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

Bulletin:

Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

History:

Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOSProgramming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC developmentScripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

Classic books:

The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-MonthHow to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

Most popular humor pages:

Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D


Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.

FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.

This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...

You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site

Disclaimer:

The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

Last modified: August, 13, 2018