@Demian – not really. But I know some of the vocabulary. It is enough to get some “hunch” of what a piece is about and then I use yandex and/or google translations.

Posted by: b | Sep 1 2014 9:50 utc | 3

The following is a fundamental characterization of the east Ukraine conflict. It can be summarized in one sentence but I begin with some background first.
The Russian government spokespeople have been saying repeatedly for months they’ve no intention of military interference in Ukraine. They’ve also been saying it stronger, by saying there’s no conceivable future set of developments that could change this policy. The policy is: the Ukraine conflict is, and shall remain, an internal conflict in Ukraine. This was reiterated by Lavrov today, 1 Sep 2014, when he said: “There will be no military interference [by Russia in Ukraine]. We are committed exclusively to peaceful….” http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/747481 . (By the way, Obama recently reiterated that, no matter what else happens, there will be no military interference by NATO in Ukraine).
On 29 Aug 2014 Russia called for “an immediate and unconditional ceasefire followed quickly by an inclusive national dialogue in Ukraine.” Similary Lavrov 26 Aug 2014 said “We firmly believe that ceasefire must be unconditional.” An unconditional ceasefire would put the separtists in possession of Donetsk and Lughansk cities. Kiev has repeatedly said it won’t agree to that. Kiev says that negotiations will only begin after the mititary capitulation of the separatists. The separtists are left with no choice but to keep fighting. So, the Ukraine conflict is, and shall remain, an internal military contest in Ukraine. It is not, and is not going to become, a political contest, nor an international contest.
On 17 Jul 2014 the US ambassador in Ukraine said: “Ultimately there’s not going to be a military solution to this confrontation…. As long as the rebels in East Ukraine continue to receive material support from Russia, I don’t think there’s any way that Ukraine can prevail military against that.” (time 8:20 @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y30NfxXAdVY ).
I disagree with the US ambassador. First of all, the material support the rebels get from Russia has been, is, and will be, non-leathal only. It would be contrary to deep principles in the Russian foreign ministry to give weapons to the rebels. The same principles are at the Kremlin. The US ambassador disagrees with me about that judgment. As to who’s right, me or the US ambassador, you’ll have to decide for yourself from your own information sources, because I’m not going to take the time to demonstrate it today. Assuming now it’s me who’s right, then east Ukraine is a military conflict that is only going to have a military solution, and, as I said in a previous post, the rebels don’t have the resources to win it in the long term (especially they don’t have enough fighting men). This is the key reason why Kiev is won’t agree to an unconditional ceasefire. Kiev disagrees with the US ambassador.
I was inspired to write the above by Lavrov’s comment today that “There will be no military interference [by Russia in Ukraine].”

Posted by: Parviziyi | Sep 1 2014 11:24 utc | 5

the punch line at the end was a real gut slapper
“to support a free press where it still exists and outlets like Radio Free Europe that bring the truth to people who need it”
https://notevenpast.org/persuasion-propaganda-and-radio-free-europe-the-new-archive-no-9/
http://www.amazon.com/Radio-Free-Europe-Liberty-International/dp/0804773564
“How does a nation fight a war of ideas? When the battlefield is popular opinion, how does a state arm itself? In 1949, the United States found its answer. Their weapon: the airwaves. The CIA launched Radio Free Europe in 1949……………”
Love that free press, lol
Radio NATO/CIA controlled Europe?

Posted by: Penny | Sep 1 2014 11:52 utc | 7

@Penny #7:
That shows you how clueless the American elite is about Russia. The Soviet Union thought it needed to jam Radio Free Europe. Post-Soviet Russia doesn’t need to jam anything; it allows free access to all public information from anywhere in the world. What it does with Anglophone media and outright propaganda outlets like Radio Free Europe is not block access to them, but mock them.
American officials wail in outrage at Russia. But Russian officials mock the US establishment. Russians have always been interested in other major cultures. It is part of the American self-understanding that America is God’s gift to man, so Americans don’t even have a concept of other cultures. Either you are an American, or you are someone who can be made to be like an American. Obviously, this cultural autism is having an increasingly detrimental effect on US foreign policy.

Posted by: Demian | Sep 1 2014 12:36 utc | 9

This is an extremely smart move,

have urged Kiev to acknowledge their autonomy within Ukraine, but said they wish to remain an integral part of the country.

imo, this would satisfy the EU, Russia certainly, perhaps Kiev if they would accept a small ‘climb down’. The problem, of course, will US/UK.

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 1 2014 12:56 utc | 11

I normally avoid WaPo, but decided to click on your link. After skimming the item what do I see at the bottom for the first related WaPo link but the Mrs Polish foreign minister item.
But then the comments are really very encouraging. I guess the majority of comments are result of people feeling somehow duty bound to have to read WaPo. I’m glad I feel no such obligation.

Posted by: YY | Sep 1 2014 13:03 utc | 13

Not to be left out, NYT on its OpEd page today publishes some unhinged invective by Ben Judah, “Arm Ukraine or Surrender.” A commentator on Niqnaq’s blog, I think correctly, speculates that there is a filial connection between Ben Judah and Tim Judah, that obedient hack of Empire who made a name for himself championing NATO’s air war against Yugoslavia.
Here is a sample of scion Ben’s work:

Either we arm Ukraine, or we force Kiev to surrender and let Mr. Putin carve whatever territories he wants into a Russian-occupied zone of “frozen conflict.”
It is a stark choice, and Mr. Putin is not rational. Any rational leader would have reeled from the cost of Western sanctions. Russia’s economy is being hit hard by a credit crunch, capital flight, spiraling inflation and incipient recession. This will hurt Mr. Putin’s surging popularity at home. But none of this has deterred the smirking enigma.

Posted by: Mike Maloney | Sep 1 2014 13:09 utc | 15

Gotdaaaamn, Mike, that’s more than “unhinged”. More than just warmongering – it’s crazy shit.

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 1 2014 13:14 utc | 17

Who’s braver, Ludmila Hohlova or most of the commentators at this space? I’m going with the former in spades. She puts all of you to shame and for shame. She doesn’t carry water for Putin and instead challenges his lies.
And guess what? She’s Russian unlike many of you (at least that’s my assumption but perhaps many of you are Russian and I’m wrong about that). It’s not surprising she hasn’t been covered or mentioned at this blog.
I will cover it at mine. I want her memory and accomplishments documented so when she meets her not-so-mysterious demise within the next year, she’ll be commemorated for bravely standing up to a murderer in stark contrast to the cowards who frequent this space.
Ludmila Hohlova puts Colonel Pat Mustard and all his Special Forces goons who haunt his space to shame and shows them up for the cowards they truly are. She stands up to and confronts tyrannical power. They not only cower before it but go a step further and carry water for it. Sickening.
All that American taxpayer money over the years and this it what it got the Americans — ranking officers, past and present, cowering before, taking cover from and aiding and abetting with words and sentiment tyrannical aggressors like Putin. It doesn’t get much worse than that.
Go Ludmila — you’re ten times the Man these spineless imps never hoped to be but pretended they were and are.

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Sep 1 2014 13:41 utc | 19

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 1, 2014 9:05:30 AM | 14
I don’t think anyone controls Ukrainian oligarchs, they are out for themselves – only.
Der Spiegel in a prophetic 2010 article on the Ukrainian proxy war
In Russian Hands: US Forced to Change Course in Relations with Ukraine

The Americans had already written off their long-time favorite Yushchenko — a man who then-US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright smiled widely at during a 2000 meeting as a grandmother would her favorite grandchild. In his classified dossier for National Security Advisor Jones, Ambassador Tefft only devoted one line to his political obituary: “He is widely blamed — not least by many who voted for him in 2004 — for his poor management, incessant quarrelling with Tymoshenko at the expense of national interests, needless antagonizing of Russia and his penchant for seeking declarations of membership from NATO and the EU.”

Poroshenko is considered close to Yushenko …

Posted by: somebody | Sep 1 2014 13:45 utc | 21

@15
This will hurt Mr. Putin’s surging popularity at home. But none of this has deterred the smirking enigma.
Accordingly, then Putin is a Smirking Puzzle.
When an oaf becomes frustrated with a puzzle, there is only one cure. He must smash puzzle with big hamlike fist.
Are the effects of sanctions as great as Judah proclaims?
Russia has many trading partners. Further, The EU may be forced by necessity to come around.

Posted by: Fast Freddy | Sep 1 2014 14:21 utc | 23

@22 I think Libya was more of a French and Italian event, but the warmongers in DC and London were terrified of a military success without them. The indispensable nations wouldn’t be necessary along with their bases. As a result, there seems to be random decisions and waffling because we’ll. ..Cheney made a deal with Gaddafi. The Chinese got into neo-Libya anyway.
Could you imagine the reaction to Hollande and Berlusconi (he was around then?) dragging a villain Ronald Reagan couldn’t topple through the streets?

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Sep 1 2014 14:25 utc | 25

@24 I think it’s just a diplomacy game. The Kiev regime has too many dead enders in their base willing to use violence to accept a peace. Poroshenko and friends would be removed or at least forced out of Kiev with at best a demoralized and broken force to be loyal.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Sep 1 2014 14:34 utc | 27

Mina and NotTimothyGeithner, check out this post on naked capitalism from yesterday. It helped me understand that there is a proxy war being waged in Libya. The U.S. is backing the salafis who are Qatar’s and Turkey’s proxies against the Haftar forces supported by Saudi Arabia, UAE and Egypt. The author of the piece tilts to the Haftar group being the more popularly representative.
One thing I learned is the following: “Widespread Libyan calls for a return to the 1951 Constitution — drafted by the United Nations and the 140 or so Libyan tribes — have been consistently ignored by Washington and Brussels.”

Posted by: Mike Maloney | Sep 1 2014 14:49 utc | 29

Demian @4
Thanks for the link. What a waste of lives it all is. Just for the ego and greed of gobshite politicians and their paymasters.
It is interesting that some of the soldiers appear to have freshly minted US 100$ bills in their wallets or passports. I guess, in all truthiness, these bills were personally printed by Putin to discredit the Ukrainian armed forces.

Posted by: Yonatan | Sep 1 2014 14:59 utc | 31

20
IMO Its not america, its western peoples in general. Dont believe for example that europeans are less idiotic when it comes warpropaganda than americans.

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 1 2014 15:11 utc | 33

Saker is now reporting on some major news out of the Ukraine:

At talks in the Belarusian capital, the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics have urged Kiev to acknowledge their autonomy within Ukraine, but said they wish to remain an integral part of the country.

LOL! I have not even opened the RT original, but wrote this comment on Saker (hopefully accepted for publication in the afternoon Florida time.)
This thing was so obvious, that I have not even bordered to comment on it before. This week I have heard some of the more sensible voices in the West state that “Russia should get / be allowed to keep ‘Eastern Ukraine’ / Donbass”. Evidently these people never asked Russia if it had claims over the territory or was ready tho accept them as part of Russia. This is the consolation prize least favorable to Russia, and most likely exactly what Putin does not want. This is the model Putin implemented in Crimea March for the benefit of an united Ukraine – “we will handle your terrorist and separatist problem here and stop the Crimean cancer and civil war from spreading to the rest of Ukraine.” If someone is now suggesting the same model for Donbass it is only because because the West wants to cut its losses and continue its fascist tyranny over the rest of Novorossiya. The offer would have been reasonable in May, not any longer.
The resistance has done something incredible, waged open war against the West – starting with little more then 20 men and a crowbar* – and won. The victory on the southern front and the almost total rout of the Ukrainian army is not only important for the war in the Donbass, but has global geopolitical consequences – almost in the scale of the Battle of Stalingrad. No, the Ukrainian Civil War is not over, but neither was Hitler defeated in 1943. I do not think I need to remind the readers of this blog that so far Russia has in no way interfered in the civil war or the events in Donbass.
(* Yes, when Strelkov entered Slavyansk he used a piece of rope and a van to pull open the steel screen from the windows of the police station and get hold of the assault rifles inside. I assume he also brought a crowbar to the break in.)
This victory must now somehow be reflected in the political solution. Novorossiyan tanks starting a march toward Kiev is the worst way to solve the issue, but still one of the options. The demand for “autonomy” within an “United Ukraine” is only the starting position in the negotiation process. This would create a double-plus-mega-Maidan armed to the teeth with main battle tanks and rocket artillery. If MPs were ever elected to a new Rada they would ride to work in T-80 tanks with an armed guard of 100 “Colorado” terrorist. The resistance could still go on with the civil war in other parts of Novorossiya and in Zakarpattia. I do not think this is a viable option.
What it is, is a clear statement that we as the resistance have equal say in Ukrainian affairs as the Maidanites and their Western handlers have. There is no legal grounds for a Western demand that Donbass exits from Ukrainian politics.
A militarized Donbass does not automatically mean a demand that Nazis and Maidanites disband their NazGuard Battalions and other illegal paramilitary structures. It just demands that cease activities in all of Novorossiya and preferably withdraw from Kiev to their support areas in core Banderastan in the west.
As for Putin’s two statements. I have not him mention Donbass or “Eastern Ukraine”, although this was widely reported in the West. Reading from the originals, I think he only uses the terms Novorossiya and South–East. A huge difference.

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Sep 1 2014 16:17 utc | 35

Sorry I messed up the NYT quote.
Here I go again.
link [link layout corrected – b]

Just as the United States resolved in the aftermath of World War II to counter the Soviet Union and its global ambitions, Mr. Obama is focused on isolating President Vladimir V. Putin’s Russia by cutting off its economic and political ties to the outside world, limiting its expansionist ambitions in its own neighborhood and effectively making it a pariah state.
…
“That is the strategy we ought to be pursuing,” said Ivo H. Daalder, formerly Mr. Obama’s ambassador to NATO and now president of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. “If you just stand there, be confident and raise the cost gradually and increasingly to Russia, that doesn’t solve your Crimea problem and it probably doesn’t solve your eastern Ukraine problem. But it may solve your Russia problem.”
…
Mr. Obama helped Russia gain admission to the World Trade Organization; now he is working to limit its access to external financial markets.

Posted by: PuppetMaster | Sep 1 2014 16:37 utc | 37

@29 We originally dispatched Hefter (evil leads to incompetence) to take over the Benghazi elite. Of course, the NTC (2011 is so long ago, but I think this was the acronym) wasn’t an oppressed segment of Libyan society, and they knew what a twit Heater was from his misadventures and thuggery in Chad. My understanding was he was 0 for 30. They knew he was a loser conning Americans as opposed to a political exile
I think Hefter is popular with the Libyan equivalent of American hipsters who are on American social media platforms. Libya is way behind on those platforms compared to the rest of the Arab world, and let’s be honest, this is the demographic most open to foreign journalists in any time and place. I believe older people (35 or 40+) and the rural populace know him as a failure. If he was more popular, he would have run for PM or put together a political bloc. His popularity is weak. Perhaps his public position would be popular, but the man is a lower.
I suspect even American intelligence agencies have determined Hefter is an unreliable thug who would not make for good print if he came to power. Egypt would love a non-functioning Egypt. They could offer to protect Western oil fields for a small cut. Hefter is perfect for them. He sucks up oxygen from sensible choices while sowing chaos by letting him just be himself.
As far as that 1951 constitution goes, Gaddafi didn’t take power because Libya’s polity was healthy. I would hazard this still remembered even if not by the West. I would say the primary reason for the timing of the internal Libyan revolt was Gaddafi’s age and the less than reputable characters of his sons. Like the Sadaam boys, it’s best to get them before they consider consolidating power.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Sep 1 2014 16:37 utc | 39

10 year anniversary of one of the most inhuman acts in human history: the Beslan school massacre.
http://rt.com/news/183964-beslan-school-hostage-crisis/
Now, who paid for this? Who supported this? The same kind of horrors that seem to repeat themselves wherever the CIA goes…
__________
Please folks – the allowed html tags above the post input. Please use them to shorten links down to something reasonable. We’ve all, I’m sure, blown up the layout (I know I have) but please, if we can…
___________

Posted by: guest77 | Sep 1 2014 17:09 utc | 41

Date 1 Sep 2014. Ukraine’s Minister for Defense, Valery Heletey (Valeriy Geletey), said on his Facebook page that the rebels had been defeated and Russia had been forced to begin a full-scale invasion of the region with regular forces. “A great war has arrived at our doorstep – the likes of which Europe has not seen since World War Two,” he said. Source: British Broadcasting Corporation. Yesterday the same defense minister said on television: “The information that Russian troops are there has been confirmed. We are fighting Russia and it is Russia which is deciding what will happen in Donbass.” — Source. “Kiev can’t publicly admit how badly they are losing both men and material, so Kiev alleges the forces must be coming from Russia,” said a sane commenter on the Internet. Question: Does this Kiev defense minister seriously believe his allegation, or is he lying?

Posted by: Parviziyi | Sep 1 2014 17:27 utc | 43

Assuming mass disaffection with the ultra nationalists and oligarchs, or anything close to it, and (doubtful but I’m just musing here) participation of the south-east in the upcoming election, I think the US/EU might feel the need to rush in some Diebold and Sequoia machines to ensure “transparency”, I don’t think they’d abide an open and free election that would see Ukraine turn east, or neutral and independent, or anything but what THEY have in store for FOB Ukraine /fracking wasteland east/gmo monoculture paradise west. I don’t know what will have to happen to see Ukraine emerge, in tact, stable, and free from the clutches of Western plans laid out above. I just can’t see anything beyond an independent Novorossia as buffer between NATO and Moscow or it’s really going to be a broader war with the possibility of turning into vWWIII.

Posted by: Colinjames | Sep 1 2014 17:49 utc | 45

Ben @ 30
“Trouble is Penny, most Americans don’t have enough “intelligence” to be insulted. MSM media sees to that, by keeping any meaningful discussions about what’s really going on in the world, off the air, or out of the print media”
Hi ben! I suspect that the numbers of Americans with the intelligence to be insulted is expanding… Despite msm not wanting to acknowledge that fact
The Americans I interact with online are darn savvy, including yourself. 🙂

Posted by: Penny | Sep 1 2014 18:16 utc | 47

Meanwhile, the Kyiv post writes a piece glamorizing the Azov Batallion, which as the BBC and Irish Times have both reported, “was formed by the Social National Assembly” and has members whose beliefs align with “a typical neo-Nazi narrative.”
And what do we see printed at the end of this ode to neo-nazism? This: “Editor’s Note: This article is produced with support from http://www.mymedia.org.ua, funded by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark and implemented by NIRAS and BBC Media Action, as well as Ukraine Media Project, managed by Internews and funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development. Kyiv Post+ is a special project covering Russia’s war against Ukraine and the aftermath of the Euromaidan Revolution. Content is solely the responsibility of the Kyiv Post.”
It’s not something that we don’t all know, but rarely is our (and European) government’s support for neo-nazism so explicitly stated. Tell all your friends.

Posted by: ee | Sep 1 2014 18:42 utc | 49

From ClubOrlov.blogspot, 28 Aug:

The media coverage [about Ukraine] in Russia is relentless, with daily bulletins describing troop movements, up-to-date maps of the conflict zones, and lots of eye-witness testimony, commentary and analysis. There is also a lively rumor mill on Russian and international social networks, which I tend to disregard because it’s mostly just that: rumor. In this environment, those who would attempt to fabricate a fictional narrative, as the officials in Washington and Kiev attempt to do, do not survive very long….
Lugansk People’s Republic (LPR) and Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) …. have received no official political support from Moscow, which asked for the referendums to be postponed, and repeatedly asked for a cease-fire and an international, negotiated settlement to the crisis. The leadership of LPR and DPR has refused, and now aims for an outright military victory…. The Russian government has withheld all military support, limiting itself to providing humanitarian supplies…. The weapons in the “rebels’” arsenal are trophies, which they seized from the retreating Ukrainian forces [plus from armories they took over in east Ukaine near the beginning of the uprising]. That said, the “rebels” are indeed being supported—but by the Russian people, not the Russian government.

I agree with the above. However, the article goes on to claim that the rebels will probably eventually prevail militarily in the conflict, which is something I think is mistaken.

Posted by: Parviziyi | Sep 1 2014 18:53 utc | 51

@48. I agree with your assessment as well. Additionally, MH17 was shot down at a critical moment of the war when the tide was turning for the prospect of Uke military success in the east. The first choice for the outcome for the west was surely a western/NATO puppet with the pre-war boarders of Ukraine. The shrinking Ukrainian borders were not intended, but creating a weak, unstable entity full of chaos was the most desirable second choice above retaining the old borders.

Posted by: yellowsnapdragon | Sep 1 2014 19:17 utc | 53

@kate #42
You said: “Many people here are commenting about how clueless americans are. I agree, but i think it is beyond the fact that our media is more tightly controlled than any in the russian federation. I am starting to realize that america (as a population group) has no defining culture that binds us together – unlike the citizens of eastern ukraine. ordinary people who fight FOR something will prevail over forces fighting AGAINST something. the only thing that binds us, as americans, together is a finely crafted fear of the “other”. the afgans are fighting “for” something and are kicking our ass, the libyans are fighting “for” something and are kicking our ass, the iraqi people, the people of gaza, the people of syria , etc. we are a hollow country. i am not an armchair political person, nor a war strategist, just an american grandmother who is trying to leave a legacy of understanding the deeper truth to our family. true peace matters to grandmothers everywhere. I will fight this november to hold our elected officials accountable to the grandmothers everywhere.”
I used to think Americans were just stupid, but as I get older – I now think it is due to inexperience.
Americans, unlike the entire rest of the world, have never had a long term, systemic economic debasement (yet). Centuries of warfare, of aristocratic/feudal privilege, of economic and social repression have made most of the people in the rest of the world wary of leaders and of government. They understand viscerally how dangerous government can be in the wrong hands.
Americans, on the other hand, think they control their own destiny almost entirely.
This past 2 decades is proving this view wrong – as yet I see no signs of either the realization of this or the later action to remedy the situation. Most people I talk to know “something’s wrong”, but have no idea what it is.

Posted by: c1ue | Sep 1 2014 19:23 utc | 55

adding:
There were govt officials, Pentagon spokepeople, members of congress, etc who blamed the media for the lost war. Plus, that’s when media consolidation began, FCC enabled it, it was cheered by the right wing, and it’s only grown worse since.

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 1 2014 19:29 utc | 57

demian – thanks for your comments, most of which i am in full agreement with. ditto lysander @56.
kate @42 – thanks for commenting on this ongoing question.. i agree with c1ue @55, especially their last 3 sentences.
Parviziyi – thanks for your comments. i think you are being too rational in trying to understand the destructive actions of others whereby they benefit from the destruction regardless, as they are not the one’s living in the place they are destroying, or next door to it( like russia in the ukraine example).
it would be nice to think more americans are waking up to the havoc there country is responsible for, but i doubt they are. until americans experience the pain and suffering they are inflicting on others firsthand, they will continue on with an acceptance of the propaganda told to them about other leaders and people in faraway lands… okie or whoever upstream is right – their will be no images of war and the atrocities that go with war, as it is the wrong type of graphics that would encourage more people to be strongly opposed to making war in other countries.. it is bad enough many americans are working for corporations like lockheed martin, boeing, and all the other military industrial corps, let alone the nsa and etc. etc. which paints a picture of the only ones working being in the death to others in faraway countries industries..

Posted by: james | Sep 1 2014 20:41 utc | 59

Posted by: Demian | Sep 1, 2014 2:33:15 PM | 48
Of course, Todorov is just one guy. But what he said is what I would do if I were in a position of decision-making in the US establishment. Also that has been the outcome I feared most since I discovered the composition of the new Kiev regime back in the February and their attempt to replace the Ukrainian army with the neo-Nazi militias. You simply cannot keep the Ukraine as a whole with ultra-nationalist at the helm of the government.
After the violent take over of government, the Kiev regime never tried any national reconciliation and tried to build a political army of their own. That is a sure recipe for a civil war, and they were trying to start a civil war with an incompetent army recruited from right wing activists which are only good for terrorizing civilian population. The only realistic outcome of that development was a civil war and the eventual partition of the Ukraine.
What Todorov said only confirmed my fear, that the partition of the Ukraine is not an unintended consequence but an expected and intended one. Also he is not the only guy who said that. There was a piece in Counter Punch in April 18.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/04/18/ground-troops-to-ukraine-really-mr-ambassador/

Ground Troops to Ukraine, Really Mr. Ambassador?
by Col. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR
Meanwhile, like Secretary Kerry, Ambassador Jeffrey is ignoring the simple truth that Mr. Putin is doing the West a favor by removing the Russians from Ukraine through annexation.
The good news is that Mr. Putin is creating the conditions for the emergence of a free, democratic and smaller, as well as, demographically more homogenous Ukrainian State. A quick glance at Ukrainian election results over the last several years demonstrates conclusively that the Ukrainians living west of the Dnieper River in overwhelming numbers want to divorce themselves from Russia and live inside Europe.

I don’t know about this Col. Macgregor guy. But what he said is the basically the same thing the Todorov guy said.
More recently there was this piece from the Kiev Post in August 2.
https://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/boris-danik-imagining-donbas-vote-for-ukraines-parliament-359055.html

Imagining Donbas vote for Ukraine’s parliament
by Boris Danik
Notwithstanding Russia’s role in stimulating the Donbas separatism, large segments of population in that area didn’t need much stimulation to vote with guns against the new Ukrainian government which they detested. And many still feel the same way, embittered by urban destruction and civilian casualties for which they blame Ukrainian troops.
…
As long as large population centers in Donbas are under rebel control, they will not take part in the next parliamentary elections, and will not help split Ukraine.
…
Hypothetically, reconquering all of Donbas would open a plethora of problems for Ukraine’s democratic government, how to accommodate the traditionally pro-Russian population that basically despises Ukraine not of their own making, with Russian civilization attributes.
Perhaps the best realizable outcome could be a semi-permanent ceasefire if all sides would be willing to accept it. After all, a ceasefire in Korea has held a long time. Or think of Transnistria, and don’t reject it out of hand. It may be a puny model but better than the non-stop war. Again, this is hypothetical, but so are most other solutions.

The writer is some kind of Ukrainian émigré living in New Jersey. What he said is also the same thing as Todorov and colonel Macgregor said.
Where do they get this idea? My hunch is that this idea of the partition of Ukraine has been presented and discussed in the US think tank circles, and they participated in some of them.
Also, to serve the geopolitical purpose of the US neocons, this partition of the Ukraine should not be an amicable one. It should be a bitter, bloody and prolonged one to multiply the existing differences and hostilities. Only after enough blood is spilled and enormous anger is created, the eventual line of partition will become a line of immense hatred and serve as a geopolitical wedge between Europe and Russia. It is all Mackindian scheme to contain an Eurasian heartland power.
I still think controlling all of Ukrainian is just a bait to force an Russian action, and the real goal is the creation of the geopolitical wedge. And that geopolitical wedge can be created only by the defeat of the Kiev regime.
I think if Russia and/or Novorosiya gains all the Ukraine and still lose the economic cooperation with Europe, Russia loses. The real game is there: the choice of Europe.

Posted by: PuppetMaster | Sep 1 2014 21:07 utc | 61

@PuppetMaster #61:
It’s possible that there were two “schools of thought” on this matter in US foreign policy and military circles: “realists” and hardliners who wanted to get it all. As I said, that the DoD was renovating schools in Sevastopol is a pretty clear indication that the plan was to get Sevastopol.
Another consideration is the US propaganda that was coming out once the “unrest” in the southeast began. A common theme was that even in the east, it is only pensioners who feel an affinity for Russia; young Europeans overwhelmingly identify with Western Europe and the US. This suggests that large portions of the US elite believed that not enough southeastern Ukrainians identify with Russia for that region to break away.
As for the junta not being willing to engage the people of Donbass, I think the explanation is not that they wanted to provoke it into rebelling, but that they are rabid nationalists who hate Moskals, so that any kind of accommodation with the east would be an affront to their total Ukrainian superiority over Russians.
It may be hard for someone not familiar with the region to believe, but it really is true that the core of Ukrainian nationalism is hating Russia and Russians and blaming it for everything.

Posted by: Demian | Sep 1 2014 21:44 utc | 63

‘From the NYT piece you quoted.
It is a stark choice, and Mr. Putin is not rational. Any rational leader would have reeled from the cost of Western sanctions. ‘
another US state media gem! ‘rational leaders’ seem to prefer backing and aiding neonazis.
a new defn of ‘rationality’?

Posted by: brian | Sep 1 2014 22:23 utc | 65

The Americans I interact with online are darn savvy, including yourself. 🙂
Posted by: Penny | Sep 1, 2014 2:16:38 PM | 47
has Magnus Robot Fighters NorthAm arrived! isnt Penny…canadian?!

Posted by: brian | Sep 1 2014 22:41 utc | 67

@brian #65:
Western elites think in terms of neoclassical economics and game theory. So that op-ed writer is implicitly assuming that rationality means utility maximization. (This is also why Obama, Kerry, and Cameron keep on saying that “Russia will face further costs.” That’s thinking about Putin’s behavior in terms of game theory.) According to economics, there is no such thing as morality; moral values are just subjective preferences.
Thus, backing Nazis is perfectly rational if others pay the costs of living under Nazis, but you reap net benefits from from installing a Nazi regime.
In other words, Western elites are utterly nihilistic. Both Putin and Alexander Dugin talk about this (although they may refer to the West in general, not its elites specifically).

Posted by: Demian | Sep 1 2014 22:56 utc | 69

kremlin stooge has another article up.. the comment section is a good read for the most part..

Posted by: james | Sep 1 2014 23:30 utc | 71

Banda Bassotti, a rather famous Italian band known for playing a lot of old Communist/Socialist songs, is going to be touring in, and in support of, Novorussia. Kind of sweet.
https://www.facebook.com/bandabassottiband
What is interesting is to watch how this war is uniting European leftists – and giving some of them battle training. Maybe this is what Europe needs to push it along to finishing the revolutions that were cut down by the CIA directly following World War 2.

Posted by: guest77 | Sep 2 2014 0:02 utc | 73

@Demian & PuppetMaster

“It’s possible that there were two “schools of thought” on this matter in US foreign policy and military circles: “realists” and hardliners who wanted to get it all.

Perhaps another way of looking at this “schism” is neocon (roughly NATO) vs. neolib (roughly IMF).
(Disclaimer: total “armchair general” speculation follows.)
The IMF, to my understanding, made preservation of E. Ukraine a condition for disbursement of the agreed upon aid package ($19 US billion or something on that order); failure to do so would result in “restructuring” (which Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge interpreted as reduction). Since the IMF package would result in lucre for the managers (Poroshenko, Yatsenyuk, et. al.) they had every incentive to bring the East in line. For the IMF itself, E. Ukraine is valuable given its industrial base (and perhaps its shale gas) — lots of opportunities for wealthy foreign investors, the IMF’s preferred clients.
NATO has somewhat different aims, though the same general goal: preservation of the status quo global system which serves the concerned parties spectacularly well. For NATO, this means self-preservation through justification for its existence. An ascendant and seemingly expansionist Russia is perhaps the best justification possible as a matter of history (the big scary nuclear-armed USSR). Evicting Russia from Sebastopol was a primary goal (I did not know about the DoD renovation of schools, and the implication of NATO’s desire for acquisition — thanks, Demian!), which would also, I suspect, have served to nullify the Russian base in Tartus, Syria. This eviction may have been a precondition for the establishment of a “permanent” NATO presence in Ukraine — though they may be willing to give it a shot nonetheless. Absent that, the next best thing might be as PuppetMaster suggests, a nasty fracturing of Ukraine serving to further the Russian bogeyman allowing them to reinforce elsewhere and keep the MIC money train rolling splendidly.
If this is in anyway correct, then the neocon and neolib factions are at loggerheads. Maybe this partially explains why the Obama administration seems so confused (besides being completely outplayed by their Russian counterparts): they are receiving contradictory “advice”.
On a quasi-related note, I have not heard anyone counter the assertion of Russian expansionist ambitions by simply asking that if they are so hell-bent on territorial acquisition then why haven’t they (or didn’t they, ca. 2008/9) devoured measly Georgia? Not enough hydrocarbons?

Posted by: hamstak | Sep 2 2014 1:06 utc | 75

hamstak @75
The neocons and neolibs have joined together for fun and profit. The are now referred to as neolibcons.
RE: Ukrainian Partition / NovoRussia Statehood
This seems unlikely if, as many believe, the goal has changed to toppling Putin.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 2 2014 1:35 utc | 77

@78:

As far as Georgia, Russia was responding to an assault on its citizens. The Western warmongers haven’t brought up Georgia because the dates don’t lie, and the former President of Georgia faces a murder trial back in Tbilisi.

I hardly disagree, and have no sense that Russia has any desire for territorial conquest. What I was getting at is that Russian expansionism is the basis (if not entirety) of the current Western narrative towards Russia, and that this narrative is undermined by asking the question “Why didn’t Russia conquer Georgia?” I wasn’t actually asking the question myself.

Posted by: hamstak | Sep 2 2014 2:04 utc | 79

RE: my comment at #76:
It seems that the women that appeared in a TV interview as James Foley’s sister had previously been interviewed months before under a different first and last name.
Here is the interview as Foley’s sister: Foley Brother and Sister interview
Here is the possible “smoking gun”: An earlier interview with what appears to be the same women
There have also been questions raised about Foley’s parents.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 2 2014 2:41 utc | 81

I wasn’t expecting this:
China Warns European Union Against Fresh Sanctions on Russia
Maybe China doesn’t want one of its main export markets to tank.
I’m waiting for Kerry to say that this is none of China’s business. Only the indispensable nation gets to tell the EU wat to do.

Posted by: Demian | Sep 2 2014 3:50 utc | 83

Russian Spring
09/01/2014-20:22
From the Army of South-East:

Donetsk.
The opponent was still evacuating personnel, wounded, killed from area of Kuteynikovo, Amvrosiyevka, Saur-Mogila mound (following Ilovaysk caldron, Amvrosiyevka caldron is now being dissolved). Twenty one autos and forty two military servicemen were involved in the operation.
The artillery of Donetsk Republic Army struck at concentration of punitive troops equipment west of Donetsk – area of settlement Georgiyevka. Two trucks “Ural”, an APC and up to five troops were liquidated.
In addition, the defenders of Donetsk Republic claim control over settlements Blagodatnoye, Radchanskiy and Vakhrushevo(?). The area of Elevonka (reclaimed earlier) was cleaned up of saboteur-reconnaissance groups of the opponent.
The combat continued through night over Donetsk airport. The territory now is considered neutral. Under shelling the airport building ignited. Some troops surrendered according to unverified data… What is clear, the shelling of Donetsk from the airport has halted. The combatants consider taking the airport within short time.
Also confirmed, two boards of State Border Service of Ukraine were destroyed by combatants’ artillery. They shelled Novoazovsk on August 31.
Lugansk.
The opponent concentrated significant efforts to retain settlement Georgiyevka (north of Lutugino). One “Grad” system, an APC, two “Urans” and up to seventeen killed and wounded were lost to combatants’ artillery.
The Ukrainian military was expelled from settlement Veselaya Gora (Merry Mount). Veselaya Gora (north of Lugansk) is a key element to control Severskiy Donets (river) crossing on the route from Severodonetsk (opponent rear) to Lugansk. Taking Veselaya Gora liquidates the last bridgehead that allows for offensive on Lugansk.

Posted by: Fete | Sep 2 2014 4:12 utc | 85

Ray Mc Govern seems to vouch for the integrity of the group.
The main stream media publishes their stuff when it suits them.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 2 2014 5:00 utc | 87

from ICH:
Hard Truths on Ukraine MSM Suppress
By Stephen Lendman
On September 4 and 5, Britain will host a summit meeting of NATO heads of state. NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen will chair the proceedings.
At issue is justifying the unjustifiable. It’s doing so based on Big Lies. It’s wrongfully accusing Russia of “illegal actions in Ukraine.”
It’s suppressing polar opposite truths. It’s supporting Washington’s imperial agenda. It’s presenting a unified anti-Russian front.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39545.htm

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 2 2014 5:19 utc | 89

There is a huge disinformation campaign by interested parties.
Berlin: Ukraine’s NATO membership not on the agenda,
I hear the Netherlands say the same.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 2 2014 7:15 utc | 91

Posted by: Demian | Sep 2, 2014 4:24:15 AM | 92
The people who are actually fighting this war are more intelligent than you are.
Discussion from around half of the video. People don’t win wars if lucky they survive them.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 2 2014 8:55 utc | 93

@Anonymous #94:
The link “somebody” gave in #91, and my feeling that Germany is not going to want to antagonize Russia, especially after Merkel is gone.
Even if a process to consider Ukraine’s application to NATO were started, it would take many years. The future of the Ukraine is completely uncertain: will it break apart; how long will fascists remain in power? While Ukraine is unstable as it is, the more serious European countries will not want it to be part of NATO.

Posted by: Demian | Sep 2 2014 9:22 utc | 95

Demian at 95 I enjoy reading your comments and mostly agree with them. But regarding your comment at 95 I have my doubts. That is I am starting to doubt if Western politicians are able to think long-term. It seems they want instant gratification – they want to bash Putin/Russia and they want Ukraine, especially US/Biden and like Louis XV said: “Après moi, le déluge”.
I am slowly beginning to think that EUSA is willing to throw those regulations for applications to NATO out and thy might also turn out as just being “quaint”. However, I absolutely hope to be wrong in this case.

Posted by: Fran | Sep 2 2014 9:52 utc | 97

Fran
I have to agree here, west have completly lost it, they dont understand the danger of getting Ukraine into Nato imo.

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 2 2014 10:11 utc | 99