#Petro Poroshenko

[dadsinsuits]

Petro Poroshenko

[tomorrowusa]

Fox News retainer Brian Kilmeade got his balls handed to him by the former president of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko. Kilmeade had tried to push a MAGA Hunter Biden conspiracy theory on live TV involving Ukraine.

At the heart of every single Republican conspiracy about both President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden’s activities in Ukraine is a single claim. The claim is that Joe Biden got Ukraine Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin sacked in order to protect energy company Burisma, where Hunter Biden was on the board. That was the claim former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani brought back from Ukraine, and the basis on which Donald Trump tried to blackmail Ukraine and earned his first impeachment. [ ... ] The idea that Shokin was fired to protect Burisma has been debunked so many times that de bunk is exhausted, but it has seldom gone down with as much grim satisfaction as it did on Sunday when Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade interviewed former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. [ ... ] Kilmeade: Is that why he got fired? Because of the billion dollars and the former vice president, now president? Poroshenko: First of all, this is a completely crazy person. This is something wrong with him. Second, there is not one single word of truth. And third, I hate the idea to make any comments and to make any intervention in the American election. We have very much enjoyed bipartisan support. Please do not use such person like Shokin to undermine the trust between bipartisan support and Ukraine.

The Viktor Shokin thing has been debunked to death. Shokin is the "completely crazy person" Poroshenko refers to. But Republicans and far right US media have adopted the Goebbelsian strategy of endlessly repeating it in the hope that such repetition will cause it to get traction. It's the current version of "but her emails!".

Shokin’s own deputy testified that there was no active investigation into Burisma at the time of Biden’s actions. And not only was all this looked into as part of Trump’s impeachment, a Republican investigation launched in 2020 specifically to find any wrongdoing by Biden ended in an 87-page report that “contained no evidence that the elder Mr. Biden improperly manipulated American policy toward Ukraine or committed any other misdeed.” The claim that Biden did something wrong in Ukraine wasn’t true, isn’t true, and can’t be made true through repetition. Shokin was fired because he was corrupt, bad at his job, and everyone complained.

When the leader of their party is a four-times indicted, twice impeached, orange blob of mendacity, the only hope of the MAGA mob is to invest in a very dubious false equivalency.

Hunter Biden isn't Joe Biden. But if you really wish to compare presidential relatives, look to Ivanka Trump and her husband Jared Kushner who (unlike Hunter Biden) were in a position in the White House actually to influence policy. The Trump offspring and offspring-in law could conduct a clinic on corruption through capitalizing on their names.

Facts never change the minds of brainwashed cult members. But if you shout louder and longer than the Trump cult it will reduce the impact they have on others.

[fuckyeahmarxismleninism]

By Jeremy Kuzmarov

Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel said in an interview with Die Zeit, published on December 7, that “the 2014 Minsk agreement was an attempt to give time to Ukraine. It … used this time to become stronger as can be seen today. The Ukraine of 2014-2015 is not the modern Ukraine.”

These comments echoed those of Petro Poroshenko, the former president of Ukraine, who came to power in snap elections after the 2014 coup d’état. Regarding his signing of the Minsk Accord, Poroshenko repeated in a Deutsche Welle interview last June his previous admission: “Our goal was to, first, stop the threat, or at least to delay the war—to secure eight years to restore economic growth and create powerful armed forces.”

Meaning that Ukraine had no real intention of following the accords, but wanted to buy time while Ukraine built fortifications and developed a military strong enough to wage a war of aggression against the Russian-tilted Donetsk and Luhansk regions, which had demanded autonomy from the Ukrainian government installed in the February 2014 coup.

[russianreader]

"It's Showtime": Open Space Moscow vs. SERB

Open Space is a project that supports grassroots activists. It has two sites, in Moscow and St. Petersburg, with co-working spaces, a human rights center, and a psychological center. The Moscow site is at odds with the pro-government movement SERB, known for its provocations against the opposition. Republic correspondent Nikita Zolotarev is often at Open Space, sometimes as a volunteer. That was…

[head-post]

Former Ukrainian president not allowed to leave country

Former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has said that he was not allowed to leave Ukraine on a business trip to Poland and the US, the Ukrainian mass media have reported.

According to him, border guards refused to let him leave the territory of the state, despite his official business trip. Poroshenko stated:

“I am far from the opinion that the border guards acted on their own initiative. Everyone can guess for themselves who cancelled the document signed by the speaker of parliament [Ruslan Stefanchuk].”

Read more HERE

[putinskremlinqueen4palestine64]

Ron Paul: 'Ukraine is not our business'

This is the video where Ron Paul said the United States overthrown Yanukovich in Ukraine and installed Porenshenko along with a CIA coup d'etat back in 2014 when Obama was President and Biden was Vice President.

[justacynicalromantic]

In early 2014, Ukraine was a neutral country, with a pro-Russian president, and with 70% of Ukraine's population against NATO membership. Yet Russia bluntly violated Ukraine's neutrality and annexed Crimea, then launched a covert invasion of Ukraine in the east.

Petro Poroshenko won the presidential election later in 2014 having promised a settlement with Russia, keeping a special status of the Russian language in Ukraine. He was initially sceptical regarding NATO accession, underlined Ukraine must rely on its own strength to provide security.

Did Putin meet Poroshenko halfway? Not at all. The regular Russian army entered the Ukrainian territory in mid-2014 to fight the Ukrainian troops, which led to the Minsk-1 agreement signed in September 2014.

Further text - down under the cut, or you can follow the Twitter link to the original post:

Few weeks later, Ukraine's parliament adopted a law that would guarantee the then Russia-controlled part of Donetsk and Luhansk regions additional economic, financial and cultural powers.

How did Putin react? Russia staged sham local elections in the occupied Donbas, and then sent the regular army again to Ukraine in early 2015, which led to the Minsk-2 agreement signed in February 2015.

Zelensky was even more sceptical regarding NATO accession. Asked about NATO, he once famously said he never pays anyone a visit if he has not been invited. He won the presidential election promising to compromise with Russia - to stop shooting, sit down with Putin and talk.

Did Putin meet Zelensky halfway? Not at all. He actually raised the stakes by issuing the Russian passports on the occupied territories of Ukraine even before Zelensky assumed the office, putting him in a difficult political position since the start.

Zelensky was ready to drop Ukraine's NATO bid in an exchange for the Russian troops withdrawing from Ukraine. The talks were held already before 2022. What did Putin do? He launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

In the first weeks of the invasion, Zelensky was yet again ready to drop Ukraine's NATO bid. But he wanted to obtain international security guarantees. What did Putin do? He demanded that Russia must be consulted before any aid would be given to Ukraine in the event of aggression.

To sum up, Ukraine has consistently tried to reach a deal with Russia over the last decade, and was open to giving up on its NATO bid in exchange for the withdrawal of the Russian troops from Ukraine. Russia never reciprocated, never showed a good will, kept raising the stakes.

Both Poroshenko and Zelensky were initially sceptical regarding Ukraine's accession to NATO. Both wanted to get a deal with Putin. And Putin himself pushed both of them to seek NATO membership out of no other viable alternatives.

Up till now, Putin has shown absolutely no willingness to compromise with Ukraine. His war aims remain maximalist - subjugating Ukraine and changing its regime. He seeks Ukraine's partition, and will turn what is left of Ukraine into Russian protectorate.

Russia's imperial self-conception is that of Russian elites at large, and not just Vladimir Putin. The Russian leadership simply cannot reconcile with the existence of a sovereign Ukrainian statehood.

Therefore any sustainable Ukrainian-Russian compromise is currently not possible unless the Russian cost-benefit calculus changes. Only credible risk to the stability of the Russian regime would impact this calculus. The easiest way goes through defeating Russia in Ukraine.

[loving-n0t-heyting]

Anarchists have a natural affinity for frictionless, stateless Bitcoin, and Ukraine in turn has a long and storied history of embracing anarchy. "It's about not believing in the state," says Oleksii Mushak, a young member of Parliament in President Petro Poroshenko's ruling party. Mushak and I are enjoying a meal at Coin – "Like money," the hostess replies when I ask about the name – an upmarket restaurant in a high-rise business center on the outskirts of Kyiv. He says pushing back against government oppressors "is what Ukrainians have been doing for the last 1,000 years."

In the early days of the revolution, Mushak made his living mostly by operating a crypto-mining operation in Kyiv and fundraising for the Maidan movement, which relied in part on digital coins to buy food, armor, and protection against Yanukovych's special forces. He was elected to the first post-Maidan parliament in 2014 and became the nation's first MP to declare crypto assets.

Smth i took away from that excellent excellent vincent bevins book was the extreme amenability of anarchist organising and messaging to co-opting by radical market liberals, especially in periods of crisis and volatility. He focuses on the "free brazil movt" that piggybacked on the hype around the free fare movt to help mobilise a libertarian political upsurge in the country, but the above is also a helpful illustration

[mariacallous]

Accused of working with the Russian security service, Latvian MEP Tatyana Ždanoka mockingly donned sunglasses at a press conference – as if in a spy movie. The accusations won’t be laughed off that easily: Re:Baltica has obtained almost 19,000 of Ždanoka’s e-mails detailing how she served the Kremlin.

It’s been just over 10 years since the early February days when Kyiv’s central square, the Maidan, swarmed with thousands of protesters. Since that previous November, Ukrainians had been urging pro-Kremlin President Viktor Yanukovych to strengthen cooperation with Europe. The protests came to a head at the same time as the self-proclaimed international movement “World Without Nazism” (WWN) arrived in the Ukrainian capital.

The WWN burst into public view at a massive table in the luxurious Government House, where Yanukovych gave his  account of what was happening on the Maidan. Guests at the table warned Ukrainians of the “threat of radicalization.” Among them, with dyed red hair, sunken eyes, and a perpetual smile that seemed more like a smirk, sat Latvia’s Tatyana Ždanoka. This performance was aimed at the audiences of pro-Russian Ukrainian and pro-Kremlin television channels. 

We at Re:Baltica are familiar with this traveling circus because we investigated it in our 2016 documentary “Masterplan.” The WWN cropped up in places where Russian propaganda about the alleged resurgence of fascism in Europe needed spreading. As a member of the European Parliament (EP), Ždanoka’s presence allowed the Kremlin-controlled media to say that Europe was worried about it, too.

What we did not know at the time was that immediately after the televised meeting Ždanoka corresponded with a person identified by our Russian partners at the independent outlet The Insider as an officer of the Federal Security Service (FSB), Russia’s largely domestic spy agency, which also has a mandate to operate in the post-Soviet space.

“Hello! Do you have any interesting observations after your trip to Kyiv?” wrote one Sergei Krasin to Ždanoka the day after she sat at the table with Yanukovych.

Only that particular Sergei’s surname is not Krasin, but Beltyukov, and he has been working for the FSB since at least 1993.

Ždanoka replied that her feelings were contradictory. Yanukovych is too cunning to read in just an hour and a half of conversation. But he seemed “quite calm, composed and confident. I thought he would be more lost,” wrote Ždanoka. “There is a feeling that he is ready to use force. (…) On the other hand, some observers assume that Yanukovych will sign the agreement with the EU very soon, getting the maximum benefit from all sides.”

Her prediction about Yanukovych’s potential use of force came true. With the Ukrainian president’s permission, special forces and snipers killed more than 100 civilians on the Maidan. When not even lethal violence proved capable of driving the protesters from the square, Yanukovych fled to Russia. Ultimately the agreement with the EU was signed by Ukraine’s new President, Petro Poroshenko, who was elected in May 2014 after parliament voted 328-0 to relieve the departed Yanukovych of his authority. 

At the end of the email Ždanoka sent from revolutionary Kyiv to FSB officer Sergei, she wrote that she had also walked around the Maidan. What happened there seemed to her to be “a mixture of drama, horror film, and comedy.”

Ždanoka corresponded with Beltyukov from 2013 until 2017, according to the almost 19,000 emails sent by Ždanoka that Re:Baltica obtained. And he was not her only FSB contact. Re:Baltica has already written about another – an old acquaintance of hers, Dmitry Gladey.

Ždanoka denies cooperating with the FSB. She answered questions sent to her on a live YouTube stream but said little about the substance of the queries. She calls the leaked emails fake and speculates that it is actually the author of this article who is, in fact, working for the Russian security services.

See you at the Shokoladnitsa

Ždanoka’s letters to Beltyukov are short. The tone is businesslike. Both largely used email to arrange meetings, preferring to discuss substantive issues in person. The FSB officer regularly congratulated Ždanoka on New Year’s and her birthday. When she arrived in St Petersburg, Beltyukov met her at the airport. He did not forget to flatter her.

In one letter, he praised Ždanoka for appearing on Kremlin TV channels: “What you are doing is very important in the current situation.” Ždanoka replied with formal gracefulness: “Thank you for your kind words.”

Ždanoka usually combined meetings in Moscow with television appearances, while Beltyukov came on business. One place they met was a café called “Shokoladnitsa” in the center of Moscow, near the FSB headquarters. Ždanoka seemed to feel at home in Moscow. In exchange for participating in propagandist Vladimir Solovyov’s television programs, she was given a car for the day, and an acquaintance booked an appointment for her at a hairdresser.

Ždanoka and her handler were visibly working to help one another. Ždanoka had information and could organize events that Beltyukov wanted to see take place. He, in turn, could help her with contacts — and money.

In one email, Ždanoka begins with an apology: “Sergei, I couldn’t get a reply. Tomorrow my assistant Andrey Tolmachov will contact by the phone number you gave me.”

Russia needs exhibitions in Brussels

The busiest period of exchanges between the MEP and the FSB officer came in 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and started its conflict in the eastern Ukrainian Donbas region. These events would culminate in the full-scale Russian invasion almost a decade later.

In late summer 2014, Beltyukov asked whether Ždanoka “could organize an event on a European platform (for example, a photo exhibition) with documentary evidence of war crimes in south-eastern Ukraine. If you have such an idea, I am ready to join you.”

“Of course, Sergei, it is possible,” replied Ždanoka. “Thank you for your offer to help. But how can I find out more about your assistance?” The question seems to be about money.

At that time, Ždanoka was preparing to hold a hearing at the European Parliament on tragedy in Odesa. In May 2014, a building in which pro-Russian protestors had barricaded themselves caught fire as demonstrators from the pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian sides fought. As a result, 42 people were killed, and more than 200 injured. The event in Odesa is one of the central themes of Kremlin propaganda that calls Ukrainians fascists.

“The date is linked to the events in Odesa, but we will try to draw attention to current events in south-east Ukraine,” Ždanoka assured Beltyukov. 

She continued to organize events dedicated to the Odesa tragedy for several years afterwards.

At the end of 2014, Beltyukov wrote, “You may soon be contacted by D.G. There is an opportunity to apply for a grant offered through St Petersburg State University. At first glance, the idea seems interesting.”

Ždanoka replied that D.G. has already called her and added, “I look forward to meeting our mutual acquaintance in Riga.”

Protest provocations in Riga

D.G. is most likely Dmitry Gladey. Ždanoka previously told Re:Baltica that he is an old friend with whom she took skiing lessons in the Caucasus in the 1970s back when they were students. They continued to meet in St Petersburg, where Gladey and his wife lived, and also in Riga when Gladey’s daughter married a Latvian man.

Recently, The Insider revealed that Gladey was a member of the FSB’s Fifth Service, the group tasked in 2004 with countering the “color revolutions” in Russia’s neighboring countries. Service’s last known task was to destabilize the situation in Ukraine.

Re:Baltica has obtained correspondence between the two from 2005 to 2013, and the exchanges do not sound like normal chatting between friends. Ždanoka reported to Gladey about events she has organized, who has been invited, trips she has made, and what she has observed. 

One example comes from March 16 which Latvian nationalists celebrate as remembrance day for legionnaires who were recruited by Nazi Germany to fight against the Soviet Union during World War II. During their annual march to lay flowers at Freedom monument in Latvia’s capital, pro-Russian activists who call themselves “anti-fascists“ always try to stage a protest.

It appears that in 2005 Ždanoka herself organized provocations at these events in order to “prove“ to her colleagues in Europe that Latvia still harbored Nazi sympathies. That year “anti-fascists” dressed up as Jewish concentration camp inmates with yellow stars on their chests were in attendance, providing material for Russia’s TV channels. 

Her FSB handler’s questions indicate that was aware of the plans before the protest took place: organize the confrontations, photograph them, and send news to her colleagues in the European Parliament with the message that Nazis marched in Latvia’s capital.

“I hope you managed to get some rest? I look forward to the promised updates on the March 16th article – the text of your statement, the reactions of MEPs, and the consequences,” he wrote afterwards. 

“We had a good rest, but also had an adventure,” replied Ždanoka. “I’m sending the text and accompanying photos. The first short text explaining the photo was sent on March 16th to the Greens (53 people) in my group. A longer text was sent on March 17th to the same Greens and another group on minority issues (42 people). We will get the full reaction of MEPs next week.”  (Ždanoka, until April 2022, was a member of the Greens/European Free Alliance group.)

The letter was accompanied by photographs from the march which showed Ždanokas’ costumed supporters  being detained by the police. Another picture showed swastika-adorned posters littering the ground. Only one photo shows the Legionnaires  – old men standing calmly with flowers in their hands.

Ždanoka also forwarded Gladey a statement she had sent to her European Parliament colleagues. In it, “the MEP expresses her outrage” at the violence used by the police “against anti-fascist protesters.” The attachments also included a reaction from other Latvian MEPs calling Ždanoka’s release a “masterpiece of demagoguery.”

Wars of Influence in the East

In September 2013, Moldova, one of the poorest countries in Eastern Europe, received a severe economic blow when Russia banned the import of its wines, allegedly over insufficient quality control. In reality,  Russia was using economic pressure to prevent the signing of a cooperation agreement between Moldova and the EU at the Eastern European Partnership Summit in Vilnius a month later.

The context for  these developments dates back to 2009, when the EU established the Eastern Partnership (EaP) to bring the countries on its eastern border out of Russia’s orbit. Moscow used available arsenal – trade restrictions,  withholding natural gas supplies, information warfare – to prevent this.

As MEP, Ždanoka regularly traveled to the EaP countries and reported her observations to Gladey. This means that Russia effectively had eyes and ears in multiple important European meetings, particularly those that concerned the potential Western accession of countries close to the Kremlin’s heart. 

Back in the summer of 2010, Ždanoka first sent Gladey a program of the visit of deputies from potential EaP countries to Brussels. Later she reported back on who is ready to start the program without Russia’s ally Belarus.

“I checked my notes. Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan strongly favor full Belarusian membership, while Ukraine and Moldova are ready to accept the “compromises” offered by the European Parliament. (…) But all of them are apparently not opposed to starting work without Belarus.”

A few months later, she and other MEPs went to Moldova. In the report to Gladey, she summarized who was present, what was said, and the relationship between politicians there.

Ždanoka mentioned that a lunch was planned with then-President Mihai Ghimpu, who did not turn up due to illness. The president was represented by a deputy with a “thinly disguised dislike” for Ghimpu. “He joked that his illness was a consequence of the wine festival at the weekend.”

In 2012, Ždanoka traveled to Azerbaijan. Before such visits, MEPs are provided with thick folders containing analysis of the country’s economy and politics, CVs of senior officials, information on support from international funds, and briefings on key issues such as the oppression of youth protests. Ždanoka forwarded the nearly 70-page report to Gladey. These documents were not confidential, but nor were they meant for the general public.

And then came the climax. 

At the Vilnius in November 2013, the EU planned to sign cooperation agreements with several countries, and Russia was increasing the pressure. Wine imports from Moldova and chocolate from Ukraine had been banned. Russia threatened to cut off gas supplies, a serious concern given the approaching winter.

The MEPs agreed to adopt a resolution condemning Russia’s pressure. Ždanoka sent this, too, to the FSB officer.

“In the meantime, I am sending the draft resolution prepared by the Greens. I can’t access the other groups’ drafts, but you can get an idea from this one. Tomorrow, a compromise will be discussed and agreed upon with several groups. The debate will take place on Wednesday, and the vote on Thursday. T.Ž.”

Two days later, she sent the final version of the resolution and the text of her speech to Gladey. In it, she acknowledged that Russia was exerting pressure, but pointed to the EU’s alleged duplicity: Moldova would no longer be able to export wine to Russia, but the EU offered no alternative market. She used Latvia as an example, saying that it had joined the EU, but “the marriage was not equal.”

In essence, Ždanoka echoed the message that the Kremlin has been spreading in the Baltics for years: the EU is treating you unjustly, and if you stay with Russia, your country will be better off.

“I am shocked,” German MEP Rebecca Harms, then leader of Ždanoka’s EP group, told Re:Baltica after hearing about the emails.

“It makes clear that she had not only ‘another opinion’ on Russia-related issues (some in my group always accused me of suffering from Russophobia and from a lack of tolerance for different opinions) but was really [an] informant. I really regret that I was not strong enough to organize a majority to expel her from the Green group.“

Complaining about Russian diplomats

Ždanoka didn’t just report on live events. She also offered helpful advice to her Russian friends on how they could be more effective. 

In a 2009 email, Ždanoka sent an FSB officer “an analysis of the errors in the work of some structures that affect Russia’s image abroad.”

She pointed out that Russian diplomats abroad are ill-prepared to work with the media and are easily “outflanked” by their Baltic and Georgian colleagues, who are “young, dynamic (…) trained in the West and fluent in foreign languages.” 

She noted that this dynamic was clearly visible during Estonia’s 2007 “Bronze Soldier” event. Then Tallinn’s removal of a Soviet WWII monument was met with Russian-inspired riots and Kremlin-executed cyber attacks. Another example was in connection with the Russia-Georgia war of 2008, when Moscow’s diplomatic chicanery proved incapable of convincing the wider world that Russia was anything other than the aggressor. 

Ždanoka, in her written analysis, was also critical of Russian officials who treat foreign trips as tourism and compensate for their lack of arguments in discussions with an “arrogant attitude”: “Russia has gas and oil, so you have to respect us.”

Finally, she proposed the creation of a special ministry to promote Russia’s image abroad, taking the example of the “Latvian Institute,” which is mainly staffed by Latvians with foreign roots. They know how to talk to foreigners, she wrote. At the same time, Ždanoka lobbied for her own activities and mentioned that personnel for the proposed the new ministry could be recruited at the European Russian Forum she was organizing.

A highlight event: European Russian Forum

For several years, the European Russian Forum (ERF) was Ždanoka’s most important event in Brussels. She booked the venue in the EP building almost six months in advance and took on the role of hostess, with important Russian officials sitting at her side. Among the Forum’s founding members were representatives from the Moscow Mayor’s Office, the Russian Orthodox Church, and Ždanoka’s political group in the EP. Funders included the Russian Foreign Ministry and the Russkiy Mir (Russian World – ed.) foundation.

The forum, along with a series of discussions and exhibitions, allowed Ždanoka to bring a number of questionable people into the EP building: Russian politicians, some of whom are currently on sanctions lists; agents of influence who have subsequently been tried for espionage; and even some with links to the security services.

Through these soft power activities, Ždanoka helped whitewash Russia in the minds of some MEPs while creating content for Kremlin TV channels. The main message was that the EU cannot do without Russia and must make friends.

“What is typical of her and a number of other MPs who work in that pro-Russian style is that the Moscow media exploits it. It is all filmed,” said MEP Sandra Kalniete from Latvia.

However, she and other current and former MEPs interviewed by Re:Baltica believe that Ždanokas’ political influence in EP was marginal.

“Expanding the European Russian Forum was the key,” says another long-term Latvian MEP Roberts Zīle. “To bring the concept of the Russian world to the West.”

Not moving to Russia

After her election to the EP, Ždanoka started actively renovating her family home in Valdai, Russia, a popular holiday destination. The photos show how the sad-looking one-story house with an attic slowly came to life with new, dark green wooden walls and white window frames. Ždanoka sent the builders a kitchen plan and decided where to put the appliances. It is not clear from the emails whether anyone lives there, but it is implied that relatives live nearby.

Ždanoka will no longer be part of the new EP, as the Latvian parliament passed a law preventing her from standing because of her communist past. She has served 20 years in the EP.

After Re:Baltica and its partners published information about her cooperation with Russian special services in January of this year, Latvia’s security service (VDD) initiated a probe but declined to comment on the findings for this article. The European Parliament’s inquiry resulted in a fine of €1,750 and a ban on representing the EP in foreign visits and other events. Ždanoka claims it was a punishment for mistakes in official declaration.

In her YouTube address devoted to Re:Baltica’s questions to her, Ždanoka showed colorful brochures listing the participants of events she has organized. According to her, it had all been transparent. The Russian Foreign Ministry is listed as one of the co-financiers of the events. The rest, like her trips to Russian-backed Syria and Russian-occupied Crimea, was covered by the European Parliament – that is, the taxpayers of the European Union.

Ždanoka also called herself “an agent of peace”.

Asked by Re:Baltica whether she intends to move to Russia after her career is over, she snapped: “I am not going to move to Russia. Where you were born, there you are useful. I was born in Riga.”

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Jack Ohman, Sacramento Bee

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

July 18, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

JUL 19, 2024

Paul Manafort walking onto the floor of the Republican National Convention yesterday illustrated that the Republican Party under Trump has become thoroughly corrupted into an authoritarian party aligned with foreign dictators. 

Manafort first advised and then managed Trump’s 2016 campaign. A long-time Republican political operative, he came to the job after the Ukrainian people threw his client,Viktor Yanukovych out of Ukraine’s presidency in 2014. Yanukovych was backed by Russian president Vladimir Putin, who was determined to prevent Ukraine from turning toward Europe and to install a puppet government that would extend his power over the neighboring country. Beginning in 2004, Manafort had worked to install and then keep Yanukovych and his party in power. His efforts won him a fortune thanks to his new friends, especially Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska. Then in 2014, after months of popular protests, Ukrainians ousted Yanukovych from power in what is known as the Revolution of Dignity. 

Yanukovych fled to Russia, and Putin invaded Ukraine’s Crimea and annexed it, prompting the United States and the European Union to impose economic sanctions on Russia itself and also on specific Russian businesses and oligarchs, prohibiting them from doing business in United States territories. These sanctions crippled Russia and froze the assets of key Russian oligarchs.

Now without his main source of income, Manafort owed about $17 million to Deripaska. By 2016, his longtime friend and business partner Roger Stone was advising Trump’s floundering presidential campaign, and Manafort stepped in to remake it. He did not take a salary but reached out to Deripaska through one of his Ukrainian business partners, Russian operative Konstantin Kilimnik, immediately after landing the job, asking Kilimnik how “we” could use the appointment “to get whole,” and he made sure that the Russian oligarch to whom he owed the most money knew about his close connection with the Trump campaign.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s 2019 report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election explained at least one answer: Manafort and Kilimnick “discussed a plan to resolve the ongoing political problems in Ukraine by creating an autonomous republic in its more industrialized eastern region of Donbas, and having Yanukovych…elected to head that republic.” The report continued: “That plan, Manafort later acknowledged, constituted a ‘backdoor’ means for Russia to control eastern Ukraine.”

This policy was the exact opposite of official U.S. policy for a free and united Ukraine. Russia worked to help Trump win the White House, and immediately after his election, according to the Republican-dominated Senate Intelligence Committee, Kilimnick wrote that "[a]ll that is required to start the process is a very minor ‘wink’ (or slight push) from D[onald] T[rump] saying ‘he wants peace in Ukraine and Donbass back in Ukraine’ and a decision to be a ‘special representative’ and manage this process. The email went on to say that once then–Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko understood this “message” from the United States, the process “will go very fast and DT could have peace in Ukraine basically within a few months after inauguration.”

The investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia slowed the consummation of this plan, and strong bipartisan support for Ukraine threw a monkey wrench into the works, prompting Trump’s cronies to try to smear Ukraine as the country that interfered in the 2016 U.S. election, a story that began to come out during Trump’s first impeachment hearing. Biden’s election meant an abrupt end to Russia’s quiet absorption of Ukraine’s eastern region, and in February 2022, Putin simply invaded the country and then claimed that the people there had voted to join Russia. 

Trump seemed to bring this back up at a CNN event in June in which, referring to Putin’s invasion of eastern Ukraine in February 2022, he said: “Putin saw that, he said, you know what, I think we’re going to go in and maybe take my—this was his dream. I talked to him about it, his dream.” Trump has said he has a plan for “peace” in Ukraine that will stop the war in a day. 

Republican vice presidential pick J.D. Vance is wildly inexperienced for such a position, but he has been staunchly in favor of ending U.S. assistance to Ukraine and was the pick of that party faction. Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov cheered Vance’s nomination, saying: “He’s in favor of peace, he’s in favor of ending the assistance that’s being provided and we can only welcome that because that’s what we need—to stop pumping Ukraine full of weapons and then the war will end” Russia needs this sort of help, for just this week Ukraine forced it to remove its last remaining patrol ship from occupied Crimea (when the 2022 invasion began, it held most of its 74 Black Sea Fleet warships at ports there). 

Manafort was convicted of a slew of criminal charges for his work with Ukraine and obstruction of the investigation into the connections between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives, and was serving a seven-year sentence when Trump pardoned him in December 2020. Now he is back at the center of Trump’s MAGA Party. 

Before 2016 the Republican Party stood staunchly against Russia, and getting Republican voters to forget that history required adopting the argument of Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán, who is aligned with Putin and Trump, that democracy has ruined the United States. In this argument, the central principle of democracy—that all people must be equal before the law, and have a right to a say in their government—destroys a country by making women, people of color, immigrants, members of religious minorities, and LGBTQ+ individuals equal to heteronormative white men and permitting them to influence government. In place of democracy, they want to impose their version of Christianity on the nation, banning abortion, rejecting immigrants, and curtailing the rights of gender, religious, and ethnic minorities.

Josh Kovensky and John Light of Talking Points Memo picked up that in his speech at the Republican convention last night, Vance pushed back against President Joe Biden’s traditional idea that America is an idea, tying it instead to a place and a people. As Kovensky and Light note, this is “a somewhat-quiet, somewhat-obvious dog whistle, gesturing toward the idea there are, as some on the far-right contend, ‘heritage Americans,’” native-born Americans who have a deeper understanding than newcomers of what this country means. That view of nationhood is commonplace elsewhere, Kovensky and Light note, but its absence in the U.S. “has long made our country exceptional.” 

This nationalist concept is at the heart of MAGA attacks on immigrants, which were in full display at the convention yesterday. From the podium yesterday, Thomas Homan, director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for Trump’s first two years in office, told undocumented immigrants: “You better start packing to go home.” Trump has promised to round up 11 million migrants (although he claims there are 18 million) currently living in the U.S., put them in camps, and deport them. There were actually preprinted signs at the convention for attendees to wave, which they did with apparent enthusiasm. The signs said: “MASS DEPORTATION NOW!” 

The convention has also emphasized its opposition to women’s rights. Trump, who has proudly claimed responsibility for the Supreme Court’s overturning of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision recognizing abortion as a constitutional right, walked out last night to the song “It’s a Man’s World.” By focusing on the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to enforce it, as the protector of “Life,” the Republican platform covertly endorses a national abortion ban. 

Their rejection of democracy requires a strongman at the head of the government, and in Milwaukee that man is Trump, who will be the first convicted criminal nominated for president by a major party. He was convicted for trying to tip the 2016 election by hiding payments to an adult-film actress after they had sex, in order to keep the story from voters. 

Conference attendees are honoring Trump with large bandages on their right ear as a tribute to an injury he sustained in a shooting attempt on Saturday, although—and this is very weird—there has been no information about that injury aside from his own comments and those of his inner circle, a lack the press seems willing to ignore despite their deep interest in every piece of medical information from President Biden. As he did at his criminal trial in Manhattan, Trump keeps nodding off to sleep at the convention. 

The theme of the party has been unity, but that unity depends on everyone lauding Trump. Gone are the establishment Republicans that ran the party before 2016; even longer gone are the traditional Republicans who were chased out of the party in the 1990s as “Republicans in Name Only” because they believed government had a role to play in the economy and did not see tax cuts as the solution to everything. In the Philadelphia Inquirer, Will Bunch wrote: “Here in Milwaukee, the political pundits finally saw the thing they’ve been pleading for—unity—and what that really looks like. It looks a lot like Jonestown,” where a cult leader took the lives of his followers in 1978.

In 1959, veteran Robert Biggs wrote to Republican president Dwight D. Eisenhower, who had led the Allied forces in Europe during World War II, asking the president to make “direct statements” that would give people the confidence to “back him completely.” Americans needed “more of the attitude of a commanding officer who knows the goal and the mission and states, without evasion, the way it is to be done.” 

Eisenhower answered that “in a democracy debate is the breath of life. This is to me what Lincoln meant by government ‘of the people, by the people, and for the people.’” 

“[D]ictatorial systems make one contribution to their people which leads them to tend to support such systems—freedom from the necessity of informing themselves and making up their own minds concerning…tremendous complex and difficult questions,” Eisenhower wrote. “But while this responsibility is a taxing one to a free people it is their great strength as well—from millions of individual free minds come new ideas, new adjustments to emerging problems, and tremendous vigor, vitality and progress…. While complete success will always elude us, still it is a quest which is vital to self-government and to our way of life as free men.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[darkmaga-retard]

As the Russia–Ukraine conflict continues well into its third year, we naturally focus on the military struggle. A less visible but equally important battle is being waged within Ukraine’s religious communities. This conflict reveals the complex interplay between faith, nationalism, state power, and the ongoing war. 

Ukraine has historically been at the center of the Eastern European Orthodox world. It is on the banks of the Dnieper River in Kyiv that Eastern European Orthodoxy was born in 988 as a Slavic offshoot of Byzantium’s Greek Orthodoxy. It adopted Slavonic, a proto-Slavic tongue, as its liturgical language—a language the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), the largest religious organization in the country, still uses. 

In 2019, the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU) was founded in accordance with then President Petro Poroshenko’s “one nation, one church” vision. Poroshenko believed that an independent, national church was essential for national security, as opposed to the traditional UOC church, which was independent in governance but retained its legacy ecclesiastic connection with the Russian Orthodox Church based in Moscow. One way that the OCU displayed its nationalism was by replacing Slavonic with Ukrainian as its liturgical language. 

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, the Ukrainian government announced a series of measures identifying the UOC  with the Russian Orthodox Church and seeking repressive measures against it. On December 2, 2022, during his nightly address President Volodymyr Zelensky announced a decree that banned the activities of religious organizations “affiliated with centers of influence” in Russia and said that state services would examine the links between the UOC and the Russian church. 

If you were a Ukrainian patriot, President Zelensky signaled, the UOC could not possibly be your spiritual home. 

[workersolidarity]

Part 1: Origins of the Ukraine War

Watch "Kim Iversen: Former NATO Analyst & Top UN Official Says THIS Is The REAL Reason For War In Ukraine" on YouTube

Going back a year to remind people of the origins of the current stage of the Ukraine Proxy-war.

Today, this history is swept under the rug, forgotten about out of convenience because it runs counter to the Western narratives around Ukraine.

Once again, as I have to constantly remind people, the Far-Right forces within Ukraine; paramilitary forces such Azov, Right Sector, and C14 had drastically and exponentially increased shelling of the Donbas in the days leading up to the war. Many Eastern Ukrainians feared the Kiev regime was on the verge of launching an offensive into the DPR and LPR which had declared their Independence in 2014, triggering a kind of Civil War stalemate period for the next 8 years.

I also want to clear up another point of contention; initially, the breakaway Republics were NOT trying to become independent of Ukraine. Instead they were seeking an autonomous status, similar to what Crimea enjoyed for a time prior to the coup regime.

So let's go back to 2014 and review the facts around the origins of the War.

To begin, we must take a look at the actions taken by the Ukrainian Govt after the Maidan Coup. We should all be aware by now, regardless of personal feelings about the war or Russia's justifications for entering into Ukraine, that the United States was elbow deep in it with regards to the Maidan Coup and the govt that took power after the coup, with Victoria Nuland on audio handpicking the next President of Ukraine: Petro Poroshenko

The FIRST official act of the new coup regime in Kiev in 2014 was to remove Russian as an official language in Ukraine, beginning the waves of repression that began in earnest against Russian speaking Ukrainians in the Donbas and elsewhere in Ukraine.

And UNLIKE the propaganda we've been fed by US and Western media, the Russian Federation NEVER supported the Donbass rebels until February 2022. They were NOT funded or trained or directed by Moscow in ANY way, as attested to in this article by Jacques Baud, a former member of the Swiss Strategic Intelligence and a specialist in Eastern Europe, he was also the former head of the Doctrine of the United Nations Peace Operations. Within NATO, Jacques Baud was involved in Programs in Ukraine before and after the Maidan Coups and has authored a multitude of books on Intelligence, war, terrorism, National Security and Russia.

And he says:

But, of course, immediately after signing the agreement, Ukrainian "President" Petro Poroshenko violated the Minsk I Accords (likely on orders by NATO) by launching a massive offensive in the Donbas which ended in failure, forcing Ukraine to once again return to the negotiating table and producing the Minsk II Accords.

Minsk II seemed like it was a game changer. The new agreement afforded the Donbas Republics a degree of autonomy, which was all they ever wanted to begin with. That and to have a say in their own governance. After the Russian language was removed as an official language, the next step was to ban Russian from being spoken by government officials. This of course meant that Russian speaking Ukrainians no longer could work in or have a say in their own governance, effectively handing over control of Eastern Ukraine to Kiev. But under the new agreement, Minsk II offered the promise of a return to a degree of normalcy. It was a framework from which to negotiate a settlement between the Kiev regime and DPR/LPR officials.

Of course, Kiev refused to implement the Minsk II Accords and instead continued with a campaign of terror, randomly and unexpectedly shelling populated civilian neighborhoods with alarming regularity.

And even with all this going on, the Russian Federation treated the matter as an internal issue for Ukrainians to settle amongst themselves. I'm sure in retrospect, Russian officials wish they had done more to intervene earlier in the conflict.

In fact, only 56 Russian fighters were observed in the Donbas during this time.

At this point, the Ukrainian Military was completely and thoroughly corrupt, demoralized and broken. And so they turned to NATO to reconstitute and reimagine the Ukrainian Military. To this end and to move as quickly as possible, NATO utilized Far-Right and Neo-Nazi Paramilitary Forces to form the backbone of the reconstituted Ukrainian military.

Even after the Far-Right Paramilitary Forces were integrated into the Ukrainian Military, they remained fairly independent and still remain unreformed to this day.

Stick around for Part II on the origins of the Ukraine Proxy-war...

[theculturedmarxist]

This article was submitted to the WSWS by Maxim Goldarb, the head of the Union of Left Forces (For a New Socialism) party, which has been banned by the Zelensky government. The World Socialist Web Site unequivocally opposes and denounces the persecution of left-wing and oppositional tendencies in Ukraine by the NATO-backed Zelensky regime. We call on our readers to distribute the information about the state-backed repression of anti-war opposition in Ukraine as widely as possible.

Ukraine has long been proclaimed the freest country in the post-Soviet space. In the pro-NATO media, the country is even portrayed as a bulwark of democracy. But this is a lie. The right-wing oligarchic regime that came to power in the Western-backed coup in February 2014 has severely persecuted its opponents, using terrorist methods.

The most tragic example of not just persecution, but murder by the ruling regime in Kiev of its ideological opponents took place in Odessa on May 2, 2014, when far-right nationalists, with the full connivance of and open assistance from the authorities, blocked anti-fascist activists in the building of the House of Trade Unions and set fire to the building. To escape the burning building, many jumped out of windows to their death. Even on the ground, some of those who had survived were then murdered by neo-Nazis. In total, more than 40 people died, among whom were Vadim Papura, a member of the Komsomol (Communist youth union), as well as Andrei Brazhevsky, a member of the left-wing Borotba organization.

For this crime, no one was ever punished, even though those responsible were recorded in many photos and videos. One of the organizers of this massacre subsequently became the speaker of the Ukrainian parliament, another one became a member of parliament on the lists of the party of former President Petro Poroshenko.

In the same way, the killers of a number of well-known opposition politicians and journalists who have died since 2014 have not been punished. This includes the ex-deputy of the Socialist Party of Ukraine, Valentina Semenyuk-Samsonenko (her murder on August 27, 2014 was disguised as suicide); the ex-deputy and organizer of opposition actions Oleg Kalashnikov (he was killed on April 15, 2015); the popular writer and anti-fascist publicist Oles Buzina (killed on April 16, 2015), and many others.

The Communist Party of Ukraine, one of the largest parties in the country, was banned in 2015.

In addition, opposition-minded politicians, journalists and activists, many of whom are left-leaning, have been beaten, arrested and imprisoned in recent years on trumped-up charges of “high treason” and other overtly political charges. This happened, in particular, with journalists Vasily Muravitsky, Dmitry Vasilets and Pavel Volkov, as well as human rights activist Ruslan Kotsaba and others. It is telling that even in the courts, which are under heavy pressure from the authorities, the accusations of “high treason” as a rule fell apart and turned out to be completely untenable.

The situation has become more and more aggravated with each passing year, especially after Volodymyr Zelensky became the president of Ukraine. The formal reason for the complete elimination of the remnants of civil liberties and the start of open political repression was the military conflict in Ukraine that began in February 2022.

All opposition parties in Ukraine, most of which are left-wing parties, including the Union of Left Forces (For New Socialism) party, which I lead, were banned on fabricated, carbon-copy accusations of being “pro-Russian.”

The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) has also detained a number of opinion leaders and journalists who spoke to the media before the war, criticizing the government. All of them were accused of promoting a pro-Russian position, high treason, espionage, propaganda, etc.

In February-March 2022, a number of well-known bloggers and journalists were detained on charges of high treason and placed in pre-trial detention centers (SIZOs). Among them were Dmitry Dzhangirov (a supporter of leftist views, who worked with our party), Yan Taksyur (a supporter of leftist views), Dmitry Marunich, Mikhail Pogrebinsky, Yuri Tkachev, and others. The reason for their detention was not ephemeral treason at all, but the authorities’ fear of their public political position, which did not coincide with the official line of the government.

In March 2022, the historian Alexander Karevin, known for his political activities, disappeared without a trace after SBU officers visited his house. Karevin has repeatedly sharply criticized the actions of the Ukrainian authorities in the field of the humanities, language policy and the politics of historical memory.

In March 2022 in Kiev, Olena Berezhnaya, a lawyer and human rights activist, well known for her anti-fascist positions, was detained and placed in a pre-trial detention center under suspicion under Article 111 of the Criminal Code, i.e., for treason. Just a few months prior, in December 2021, she had spoken at the UN Security Council about the lawlessness in Ukraine.

On March 3, 2022, the SBU detained the left-wing activists and anti-fascist brothers Alexander and Mikhail Kononovich in Kiev on charges of violating Article 109 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (“actions aimed at forcibly changing the constitutional order or seizing state power”). They were placed in a pre-trial detention center until the end of 2022, where they were beaten and tortured, and denied timely medical assistance.

In May 2022, in Dnipro, the SBU detained the brother of the former presidential candidate Oleg Tsarev, citizen of Ukraine Mikhail Tsarev, on charges of “destabilizing the socio-political situation in the region.” As a result, in December 2022, he was convicted and sentenced to five years in prison on charges of terrorism.

On March 7, 2022, six activists of the opposition organization Patriots for Life disappeared without a trace in Severodonetsk. In May 2022, one of the leaders of the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion, Maxim Zhorin, posted a photo of their dead bodies on the Internet, claiming that they “were executed,” and that their murder was connected to their political views and carried out by paramilitary structures.

On January 12, 2023, Sergei Titov, a resident of Belaya Tserkov, a half-blind and disabled person with a mental illness, was detained and placed in a pre-trial detention center. He was declared a 'saboteur.' On March 2, 2023, it was reported that he had died in the pre-trial detention center.

In February 2023, Dmitry Skvortsov, an Orthodox publicist and blogger, was detained in a monastery near Kiev and placed in a pre-trial detention center.

Since November 2022, Dmitry Shymko from Khmelnytsky has been in the dungeons for his political beliefs.

Hundreds of ordinary people have already been prosecuted in today’s Ukraine for distributing political content on the Internet that the authorities considered prohibited.

The authorities have taken under tight control the information space of Ukraine, including the Internet. Any personal publication of citizens about mistakes at the front, about corruption among the authorities and the military, and about the lies of officials are declared to be crimes. Such individuals, as well as bloggers and administrators of TG channels, are subject to harassment by the police and the Security Service.

By the spring of this year, according to the SBU, 26 Telegram channels were blocked—channels on which people had informed each other about the locations where military summons were being handed out. Six Telegram channel administrators were searched and charged with crimes. Thus, public pages were blocked in the Ivano-Frankivsk, Cherkasy, Vinnitsa, Chernivtsi, Kiev, Lviv and Odessa regions. These pages had more than 400,000 subscribers. The public administrators of these channels face 10 years in prison.

In March 2022, Article 436-2 (“Justification, recognition as lawful, denial of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, glorification of its participants”) was introduced into the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In reality, it is directed against any citizens of Ukraine who have views that differ from the official government line.

This new law is formulated in such a way that, in essence, it provides for punishment for “thought crimes”—words or phrases spoken not only publicly, but also in a private conversation, written in a private messenger or SMS message, or said over the phone. In fact, we are talking about an invasion of the privacy of citizens and of their thoughts. This, in fact, has been confirmed by the practice of law enforcement—conviction for likes, private phone calls, and so on. For simple conversations on the street and likes on the Internet under posts, as of March 2023 there have been 380 sentences, based on court records, including those sentenced to prison.

Thus, in June 2022, in Dnipro, a resident of Mariupol was sentenced to five years in prison, with a trial period of two years. In March 2022, the individual had claimed that shelling of the civilian population and civilian infrastructure in Mariupol was carried out by servicemen of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

Another sentence, based on a telephone conversation in March 2023, was handed down against a resident of Odessa. That person was sentenced to two years on probation for “unpatriotic and anti-state” conversations on a mobile phone.

A resident of the village of Maly Bobrik in the Sumy region was convicted under Part 1 of Art. 436-2 of the Criminal Code in June 2022 and sentenced to a term of six months in prison because she had, in April 2022, near her yard and in the presence of three persons, expressed approval of the actions of the Russian authorities in relation to Ukraine, and later refused to admit her guilt.

At least 25 Ukrainians have been convicted of “anti-Ukrainian activities” on social media. Nineteen people were found by law enforcement officers in Odnoklassniki and held in the country. According to the investigation, these residents of Ukraine distributed “Z” symbols and Russian flags on their pages and called the invasion “liberation.”

Sentences were also handed down against those who did not distribute such publications, but only “liked” them (i.e., expressed a form of approval on social media). The texts of at least two sentences say that the so-called “likes” had the goal of “bringing the idea to a wide range of people of changing the borders of the territory of Ukraine,” and “justifying the armed aggression of the Russian Federation.” The investigators justified the prosecutions on the grounds that personal pages have open access, and liked publications can be seen by many people.

For instance, in May 2022, in Uman, a pensioner was sentenced to two years in prison with a probationary period of a year for “rejection of the current Ukrainian authorities... on the Odnoklassniki Internet network,” having put down “likes... to a number of publications that justify the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine.”

In Kremenchug in May 2022, a citizen of Ukraine was convicted under article 436-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. Using a pseudonym, this individual had spoken on the social media platform Odnoklassniki about the Nazis in Ukraine and the development of biological weapons funded by the Pentagon.

The repressive actions carried out by the current government to fight against those who disagree with it have turned Ukraine into the most repressive state in Europe, a state where any person who dares to oppose the authorities, the oligarchy, nationalism and neo-Nazism risks freedom and often even their life.

We ask you to disseminate this information as widely as possible, since in the current situation only wide international publicity about the facts presented in this article can help save thousands of people whose freedom and life are now under serious threat in Ukraine.

[bighermie]

TGP EXCLUSIVE: Unearthed Email Reveals Hunter Biden Was Notified of Official Government Call Between Poroshenko and Joe Biden in Message Sent to "Robert L. Peters" - Proves Bidens Were Secretly Working Family Business Deals Together While Joe was VP | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

[putinskremlinqueen4palestine64]

Interview with VGTRK

Vladimir Putin answered questions from the National State Television and Radio Company (VGTRK) journalist Vladimir Solovyov.

February 23, 2015

The Kremlin, Moscow

Vladimir Solovyov: Mr President, our nation just celebrated Defender of the Fatherland Day, but our brotherly nation of Ukraine now considers this the day that Crimea was conquered, and Petro Poroshenko states that he will do everything possible to get Crimea back.

What is the current state of Russian-Ukrainian relations? Will we wake up one day to learn we are at war?

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: I think that this apocalyptic scenario is highly unlikely, and I hope it never comes to that.

As for returning any territories, that is revanchist talk, and it’s not about returning territories anywhere. In my opinion – and I do not want to give any advice, but still – the current leadership of a large European nation such as Ukraine should first return the country to normal life: fix the economy, the social sector, its relations with the southeast region of the country in a civilised manner, and ensure the lawful rights and interests of the people living in Donbass. If the Minsk agreements are implemented, I am certain that this will be done.

As for Crimea, you should remember that a year ago, when I spoke to the Federal Assembly deputies about this, I said that Crimea has always been and remains Russian, as well as Ukrainian, Crimean-Tatar, Greek (after all, there are Greeks living there) and German – and it will be home to all of those peoples. As for state affiliation, the people living in Crimea made their choice; it should be treated with respect, and Russia cannot do otherwise. I hope that our neighbouring and distant partners will ultimately treat this the same way, since in this case, the highest criteria used to establish the truth can only be the opinion of the people themselves.

Vladimir Solovyov: There has been a break in opinion between the American side of the establishment and the European side. The American side says that Russia directly invaded Debaltsevo, that new sanctions should be imposed against Russia, and John Kerry even accused his European partners of taking a cowardly position. Europe currently does not support this. That is the cause of the break.

Vladimir Putin: Honestly, I have not even heard such assessments. You should know better.

Vladimir Solovyov: We say that a civil war is underway. Ukraine says, “No, this is a direct intervention by Russia.” Why doesn’t the world see the truth?

Vladimir Putin: It doesn’t want to.

First of all, the world is complex and diverse; some people see it, while others don’t want to see it and do not notice it. World media monopoly of our opponents allows them to behave as they do.

Moreover, I suppose that my somewhat careless comment during my visit to Hungary had some effect, when I said that it is disappointing to lose to yesterday’s miners and tractor drivers. It is unpleasant to lose to Russia as well, but it’s less humiliating somehow.

At the same time, we are aware of the statements made by Ukraine’s top officials, including high-ranking officials in the Ukrainian army. As the head of the General Staff said, “We are not fighting against the Russian army.” What else do you need?

But in general, all this is very bad: the attempts to justify defeat and attempts to blame it on Russia. The bad thing is that this is fanning the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, or an attempt to fan that conflict.

If – again, I’ve said it before and I’ll repeat it – if the Minsk agreements are implemented, I am confident that the situation will gradually return to normal. And I imagine that Europe is just as interested in implementing the Minsk agreements as Russia. Nobody needs a conflict on the periphery of Europe, especially an armed conflict.

Vladimir Solovyov: Were you able to draw our European colleagues’ attention to the Nazi ideology that has gained favour in Kiev? Were they alarmed?

Vladimir Putin: They try not to notice it. But what I want to note is what appeared to me as their sincere desire to find compromises that would lead to a final settlement.

After all, if you paid attention to the Minsk Protocol, it talks about decentralisation of power, and then there is a footnote stating what this implies. The authors of this footnote are our German and French partners. This speaks to their sincere desire to find the compromises I just talked about.

Vladimir Solovyov: Did the Minsk agreements allow you to revivethe degree of trust you had earlier in your relations with the leaders of France and Germany?

Vladimir Putin: You know, absolute trust is something hard to achieve even in a family, and it is much harder to achieve on an international level. But I think we understand each other, and overall, trust each other. Although, of course, there remains a certain element of mistrust, but I nevertheless had the sense that our partners are generally more inclined to trust us than not – or in any case, believe in our sincerity.

Vladimir Solovyov: Do you currently have working contacts with the President of Ukraine and do you trust that Mr Poroshenko will do what he tells you he will?

Vladimir Putin: We maintain contact. Sometimes, I’m just a bit surprised by the Ukrainian leadership’s public statements, for example, that members of our Presidential Executive Office participated in the tragic Maidan events a year ago. This is absolute, complete nonsense, so far from the truth that one even wonders where it came from. Sometimes, I later hear that these statements were based on inaccurate data from the special services – that is what I am sometimes told. I would ask to be more careful when using information that lands on my Ukrainian colleagues’ desks.

Vladimir Solovyov: In the event of military escalation by Ukraine and national battalions, could Minsk 3 talks be held, or would Russia take extreme diplomatic measures such as recognising the Donetsk National Republic and Lugansk National Republic?

Vladimir Putin: For now, there is no need for any extreme measures because these Minsk agreements are not just a document formulated by four participants in the Minsk process, meaning Ukraine, Russia, France and Germany. They are enshrined in a United Nations Security Council resolution and have taken the form of an international legal act, essentially supported and approved by the entire international community. It’s a different story, as they say. And I very much expect that it will be implemented. And if it is implemented, then this is a reliable path toward normalising the situation in this part of Ukraine.

Vladimir Solovyov: Thank you, Mr President.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.