New Cold War has an item from the Svobodnaya Pressa presenting the views of a number of regional specialists and officials affiliated with the Russian International Affairs Council (led by former foreign minister Igor Ivanov). It describes Three Scenarios for the Donbas. Renewed all-out conflict, a political settlement, or another frozen conflict. The latter seems the consensus, and it might be possible that the junta and Banderastan itself will fragment.
Bogdan Bezpalko, Director of the Center for Ukrainian and Belarusian Studies at Moscow State University, believes that the DPR/LPR will be able to hold their own. “Donbas integration with Ukraine would only be possible in the event of its military defeat which might occur should the conflict escalate.” But due to the proven capabilities of the Novorossiyan armed forces, the proven inability of the Ukrainian army and irregulars, and the probability of continued Russian support, a repeat of the experience of the Serb Krajina against Croatia is highly unlikely.
He also suggests that Kiev’s problems are of its own making. “Ukraine in 1991 had colossal resources which were squandered in the most incompetent fashion, which were stolen after the independence.”
Fort Russ has a longish essay by Rostislav Ishchenko on The Donbass and the Second Punic War. Russia has used Fabian tactics (original, not social-democratic version) to regain the strategic initiative. “The war on the Donbass is continuing. Nobody is about to end it. The Kremlin is planning to win, and not only on the Donbass.” He also discusses state- and -institution building in Novorossiya and critics of Putin (nationalist and liberal).
Russia, by the way, has stopped gas deliveries to the Ukraine. Already on a cash-only basis, Russia refused to keep subsidizing the price, and negotiations have now broken off. Not a problem in the summer….

Posted by: rufus magister | Jul 7 2015 23:28 utc | 103

in re 104 —
If you are going to allege inconsistency over time, clear documentation of the earlier position helps. This TASS item from March makes clear that they have no problem with an investigation.
But even that was not needed. The subtitle on your citation, “He [Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov] noted that the investigation of the incident continued, and the report on its results would be released at the end of the year” is sufficiently clear. I would presume Moscow wishes to avoid a Western-dominated kangaroo court.
DC has made it clear what it expects the verdicts to be. One continues to wonder, where are things like US satellite imagery or the ATC tapes?
Do please try to come up with better sources of disinformation, there was hardly any sport at all in debunking this.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jul 8 2015 11:51 utc | 105

@105 Taking into account that the Russia sponsored gorillas from LNR have downed an airplane full of Western citizens I don’t see anything inappropriate in the fact that they want to have an international court on that. And when posting TASS old news you must be rather careful not to expose their past lies. The “Ukrainian Air Forces fighter plane” version mentioned in this article is now long passe and no longer advertised on TV here.

Posted by: Arbat | Jul 8 2015 13:58 utc | 107

@105 Taking into account that neanderthals from LNR have downed an airplane full of Western citizens I don’t see anything inappropriate in the fact that they want to have an international court on that. And when posting TASS old news you must be rather careful not to expose their past lies: specifically the “UAF fighter plane” version mentioned in this article is now long passe and no longer aired on TV here.

Posted by: Arbat | Jul 8 2015 13:59 utc | 109

http://rt.com/news/272041-movie-clouds-laser-project/
The idea of such a device originally came to Dave Lynch as he was doing his master’s degree. During his studies he stumbled upon a military paper on the war in Vietnam, describing sky projections that were used as a psychological weapon against the Vietnamese.

Posted by: guest77 | Jul 8 2015 18:09 utc | 111

One of the “judgement first, then the trial” crowd, I see.
Is there some hidden overtones to “investigation” vs. “tribunal” of which I am unaware, where the former does not identify the perpetrators but the latter does?
What’s the need for a special international tribunal, there established means for investigating and settling international air traffic crashes and torts between states. Are the Dutch courts courts so untrustworthy (I’ll spot you the Malaysians, see the case of Anwar Ibrahim)? Is there a special international tribunal adjudicating the Germanwings disaster? Did one sit in judgement of the US when we shot down the Iranian jetliner a no. of years ago (the parties achieved a settlement through the International Court of Justice)?
You seem incapable of close reading of texts. It is clear that Lavrov makes no judgement on those culpable, but merely points out inconsistencies in the various Western-sourced accounts. He also reports on the disinterest shown by Western interlocutors regarding these challenges and inconsistencies, particularly the claim that a Ukrainian jet was seen in the skies, despite Kiev’s assertions none were operating. Emphasis added.

“We have been insisting on the examination of all related facts and on pursuing all lines of inquiry all along,” Lavrov said. “And we will keep doing so not because we would like to see any specific explanation gain the upper hand, but because we want the truth to be determined. This is top priority.”
“Unfortunately, one has an impression that some of our partners are interested in something else,” he said. “What they are interested in is this: once they have failed to prove that their interpretation of the affair, made public days after the crash, is the right one, the whole investigation should be mothballed at any cost and possibly shelved altogether….”
The Russian foreign minister pointed out that his Western counterparts and media for some reason “do not pay attention to numerous records of witnesses’ evidence — not anonymous people — who were saying in front of cameras that they saw a fighter jet over the scene of crash.”
“There is a witness who worked at one of Ukraine’s military airports and who said in front of camera that one combat jet was scrambled on that day and later returned without one of its missiles. What is more, the Ukrainian authorities reiterated that military aircraft had no flights on that day.” [No one is chatting on Russian TV about it, you say? Nobody here mentions anything anymore about MH17.]
“No-one pays attention to this fact,” he said. “We are tired of asking the same questions the Russian Federal Air Navigation Service and the Defence Ministry formulated soon after the crash. In my opinion, no-one is going to give answers to them.”

A bit more sport. If at first you don’t succeed, try, try, try again.
One continues to wonder, where are things like US satellite imagery or the ATC tapes? Or how about some NATO SIGINT from our mates at GHQC?

Posted by: rufus magister | Jul 8 2015 23:10 utc | 113

Meanwhile the CIA/NSA gameboys continue their string of murders. With the approval of Barack the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate slash the drone Obama, of course.
Drone strikes target Islamic State fighters in eastern Afghanistan

Two drone strikes targeted militants loyal to Islamic State in Afghanistan on Tuesday, killing between 25 and 49 insurgents, according to differing estimates by Afghan and foreign officials.

Posted by: jfl | Jul 9 2015 0:41 utc | 115

Arbat at 116 —
You’ll forgive me, but as you’re a known fool, I need to check — do you mean “gorilla” or “guerilla?” I’m thinking the former. No bias or prejudgement there, I’d reckon.
Since you raise a cloud of dust about Katyn, I will presume that we are agreed that you misrepresented the substance of the Russian position and Lavrov’s statement on the downing. I think I’ll stay focused on that, thanks.
Germanwing involves multiple states and a critical weaknesses in pilot screening and procedures. Good international tribunal stuff, IHMO. The loss of the Iranian jet involved state actors, why no international tribunal?
Why the demand for the tribunal? Stigma? Thought to be easier to pack the panel of judges than Dutch courts? International cover needed for a biased verdict?
Since no one actually knows what happened, that various parties have offered various theories as the evidence and other analyses have emerged is hardly surprising or interesting. As always, any sources you condescend to cite would be appreciated.
Here’s some better evidence than random twitter feeds. If you don’t like the analysis of Russian engineers, maybe a German pilot is more to your taste.
Again, why is it that the best evidence remains hidden? One continues to wonder, where are things like US satellite imagery or the ATC tapes? Or how about some NATO SIGINT from our mates at GHQC? And what about that Ukrainian plane spotted by Rostov ATC? Or the decisions of Kiev ATC? Looks like Humpty might have been pushed.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jul 9 2015 12:14 utc | 117

@117 The preliminary Dutch investigation report provided full analysis of ATC data which proves that our MOD has lied when they made claims about Ukrainian air control “unexpectedly” ordering the airplane to fly more to the north and on lower altitude, the same bullshit as repeated by the nsnbc article.
You “analysis of Russian engineers” is one long chain of poor science-fiction, most notably the Su-25 “unexpectedly emerging” around Boeing (3 km above Su’s operating altitude) and all that happening just in the DNR air space, where a few UAF airplanes were downed just recently! There’s also an obvious lie there: “on 17.07.2014 the armed forces of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic possessed (…) no radar detection devices, targeting and guidance equipment”. An intentional lie, as DNR has boasted about acquiring “Buk” launchers just weeks before the MH17 crash, and has proven this by downing a number of UAF airplanes. And boasted about downing the Boeing on the very 17.07.2014 until they discovered it was Boeing, not An-26, when they decided they neither have nor had any “Buk” launchers, even those whose utility they have announced and demonstrated just days before.
And not, the “gorillas” were not a typo: this statement precisely represents the true level of the DNR “administration”.

Posted by: Arbat | Jul 9 2015 13:11 utc | 119

Arbat at 119 —
I’ll take gorillas over fascists any day. Assuming they were gorillas.
I think threatening to ignore orders, undertake actions on their own initiative, and outright mutiny, like various “volunteer battalions” do regularly, is pretty beastly. Nor do I recall Lugansk or Donetsky leaders having to regularly detain militiamen for petty and grand crimes.
See this classic, a spring-time gas station holdup. Nothing says spring is here like robbin’ a gas station. ‘Cept robbin’ a liquor store or the Piggly-Wiggly.
You might recall the recent attempt at disbanding “Tornado”. The relocated unit wound up losing nearly a dozen to arrest, if memory serves. So it would seem to me that the Banderist side does most of the wilding.
In the absence of any ref. to the Dutch report, to say nothing of your Western MSM party line favorites, I think all I need do is to refer you to this convenient account of the state of play about MH17, from today’s postings at Russia Insider.
Except to add that even the tendentious Wikipedia article Zuesse complains about allows, “Preliminary evidence from the ongoing Dutch investigation has concluded that the plane was most likely downed by a Russian unit that was probably manned by a Russian crew, though other possibilities have not yet been ruled out.”
I don’t recall that anyone actually saw much of this “preliminary evidence,” but it was clearly not strong enough to forestall “other possibilities” than what someone thought “probable” or “likely.”

Posted by: rufus magister | Jul 10 2015 2:51 utc | 121

Arbat at 122 —
I’m not here to do your research. While it was quite generous to offer to share your worldview, no thanks, I brought my own. I’ve had it for a while and am quite fond of it.
You will need to supply your own references to whatever sources you use to construct your opinions. It’s up to you to do the Google search you so helpfully suggest. I did my search already (browser history, not Google, BTW).
Easier to misconstrue information if you don’t provide a source for it, right? Who can check and call you out on it?
Let’s see, I discuss and provide evidence for mass irregularities and criminality, including capital crimes and mutiny. You come back with an un-sourced discussion of some guys (literally, since you don’t give names or other details) on the take. And speculation about crime rates.
So you’ve ordered up your usual tipple here at the Bar I see. Weak case, with a splash of bitters.
Once again, if you have any specific criticism of any item that I have posted, bring it on. If you don’t like my sources, cite your own.
The usual for me, Innkeeper. Dewar’s straight, club soda on the side.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jul 10 2015 13:43 utc | 123

Apparently it did. Not that I suspect that you’ll even have a look at it, as staying in your RT-constructed zone of comfort must be so pleasant. And, unlike your chemtrails-like conspiracy blogs about Su-25 jumping out of blue sky just in front of the Boeing, the Dutch Safety Board report is hard evidence.
DPR and LPR human rights violations are very well documented in Wikipedia’s article Donetsk People’s Republic, section – surpise! – Human right violations. This includes a number of first-hand reports and comprehensive analysis from HRW, OSCE and AI. The criminal arrests of the “government” officials are listed in the Government section.

Posted by: Arbat | Jul 10 2015 14:33 utc | 125

My apologies — I had a closer look at the link itself, noticed the title. I had taken it to be some combative rightist paper, but it turns out to be the Dutch safety board.
It’s their neutral presentation of their Sept. 2014 preliminary report. It simply stated “a large number of high-energy objects” destroyed the plane. It says nothing about the source or type.
Their recent 1 July update is even more bureaucratic.

The Dutch Safety Board has reported on the progress of the investigation into the MH17 crash to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO ). Such a report is required by Article 6.6 of ICAO Annex 13, which obligates the Dutch Safety Board to release an interim statement one year after the occurrence.

Hard hitting stuff, alright.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jul 11 2015 14:06 utc | 127

in re 128
Transcripts are not the tape; the actual, complete audio is as yet unreleased. As I remember the coverage at the time, it was a little unclear who got them for the ATC and what the subsequent chain of custody turned out to be. Nor, as posted at 126 “no new information” regarding what the quaintly-styled US intelligence “community” knows about it all.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jul 11 2015 19:24 utc | 129

in re 130 — More of the same. If you’re going to attempt to parse the report, you’ll need better refs. and documentation.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jul 13 2015 12:10 utc | 131

arbat at 130 —
I’ve been settling my tab as I go along; you are playing on credit.
It is Washington and its crew making the accusations and yowling for a tribunal, they have the burden of proof. Especially with the official investigation in Dutch (read: NATO) hands. By repeating those accusations, you undertake that burden.
Since I cite sources, and you don’t (largely), this is why I get to piss and moan about them. Even crappy links (if that’s what they are) beats no links. “Technical difficulties” — uh, really?
As always, if you have specific criticisms of specific sources I cite, please do mention them specifically.
I probably use Russia Insider most, they cast a fairly wide net. Red Star over Donbass is probably my favorite politically, Butterfield seems to have made some decent connections in the Donbas.
You will note my sources on MH17 have largely been Wikis, well-known technical reports (like the Russian engineers you affect for some reason to dislike) or established journalists like Parry. Zuesse is not a household name, but I’ve seen enough of his work to know the quality level.
I shouldn’t be rummaging around the footnotes of a ten-month old report (isn’t that why I read four or five reasonably authoritative articles on it?). And yet here we go from little to no information to information at the micro level.
But I’m game. Even though I could be trying to work around the pay-wall at Kyiv Post for their take on what they call Mukacheve (vs. the Russ. Mukachevo).
So were you to provide time references and/or page references, and explain what this information is and why it might be important, and what exactly you are asserting, we can discuss it at that level of detail at which you now suggest. Please note details like time and station of final contact; was MH17 under control of Rostov, or had merely supplied a location when requested; at what time was the liner shot down?
Or you could of course just cite your own secondary source, and I’ll get back to you at my leisure.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jul 14 2015 0:33 utc | 133

@133 I could be trying to work around the pay-wall at Kyiv Post Oh, what a heroical game against The System that must be indeed. Most people in Europe would just type their credit card number and spend that $15 or whatever the subscription is. I definitely see an Eastern European kolkhoz traits in your attitude, either you’re from here yourself or you’ve been reading our blogs too much.

Posted by: Arbat | Jul 14 2015 16:09 utc | 135

And now what questionable translations and wishful analyses do we have to hand today?
Not surprisingly, Mukachevo is getting attention. Rostislav Istchenko writes of the Right Sector vs. the Junta. He believes that Poroshenko’s fall is preferrable to his suppression of Pravyi Sektor, arguing that “In Ukraine, there will be established a radical nationalist dictatorship, to which the Americans, nor especially Europe, cannot turn a blind eye. The international legitimacy of the regime will fall to zero….” That strikes me as a little wishful, actually.
TASS reports the PS fighters are moving towards Poland, quoting a leader as saying they will continue the fight, though “It may take a year or two … believe me, there are enough opportunities to increase this formation by several thousand people….”
Meanwhile, in Lviv, Pravyi Sektor says they’re in charge.
“Our organization is on call… [and] de facto controls the city to avoid provocations. To this end, we set up roadblocks around the city,” Taras Kuzyak, a local representative of the organization told the UNN agency. This is in response to Tues. morning bombings of police stations.
On the Black Sea, Vigilantes patrol the streets of Odessa. While posted by New Cold War, its from those gullible slouches at Associated Press. The vigilantes believe the corrupt government is not doing enough. They quote one volunteer saying, “We can’t allow anybody to denigrate or destroy our national values.”
So looks like smooth sailing for Poroshenko. Sure to be no command and control problems here.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jul 15 2015 0:11 utc | 137