Category Archives: Ukraine

MAJOR P.O. (BBG) Putin Says Hopes He Won’t Have To Send Troops Into East Ukraine

[This article was originally published on April 17, 2014]

 

MAJOR P.O.

Mr Putin says it loud and clear:

“… were part of the Russian Empire until becoming  part of Ukraine under
U.S.S.R.”.

“People have been trying to divide Russia, Ukraine for centuries.”

In another part of this TV Q&A program Mr Putin says, in the third paragraph :

QUOTE
“Putin Sure Russia, Ukraine Will Find Understanding, Will Never Part”
UNQUOTE

[MOSCOW, April 17 (RIA Novosti) – Russian President Vladimir Putin said
on Thursday he is sure that Russia and Ukraine will be able to find
understanding in their interstate relations.]

QUOTE
“We are all under the oppression of certain emotions, but if we love
one another and respect each other, then we must find a way to
understand each other. I think that within a family it’s easier to do
than between governments, but even within government relations, I’m
sure, that we’ll find mutual understanding with Ukraine and that we
will never part,” Putin said during a live Q&A session with the
public.
END OF QUOTE

Loud and clear.

The Historical claim, part of the same Family ,we love each other, and on and on
Mr Putin goes.

Does anyone still has any doubts that Mr Putin is rebuilding the USSR’s Empire?

Also, the “problem” in helping Ukraine to defend itself, is that one can never be sure who one is talking with.

Russia has always been calling the shots in there.

Russian agents are infiltrated in all levels of Society.

Plus Ukraine is an Internationally  recognized corrupt country, judicial system included.

So who are you going to help ?

I have said it before.

Russia is not going to stop, unless militarily forced to.

And personally, unless unavoidable, (the choice of the lesser evil), i am against the use of force.

Ukraine, on it’s own, will not be able to resist Russia for more than a few hours.

And the problem is: If the West gives up on Ukraine, what will follow next ?
 
Personally I think that the longer the West postpones the decision to confront Russia, the worst it will be.

One has to learn the lessons of History.

Francisco (Abouaf) de Curiel Marques Pereira

AUT VINCERE AUT MORI


(BBG) Putin Says Hopes He Won’t Have To Send Troops Into East Ukraine

Russian President Vladimir Putin says he has right to deploy military abroad; says he hopes for diplomatic solution in Ukraine.

Putin also says during annual televised call-in
* Govt in Kiev isn’t legitimate, don’t have national mandate
* Donetsk, Luhansk, Kharkiv, other eastern, southern regions
were part of Russian empire until becoming part of Ukraine
under U.S.S.R
* People have been trying to divide Russia, Ukraine for
centuries; Yugoslavia was split up to make it easier to
manipulate
* Russia didn’t force Crimea accession
* Ukraine political groups must reach compromise, outside
forces can only support compromise, not up to Russia, U.S.
to resolve Ukraine crisis
* Blockade of Transnistria must stop
* NOTE: Ukraine Clash Kills Three as Big Powers Meet in Crisis
Talks {NSN N462HJ6TTDS0 <go>}
* NOTE: Putin Says Ukraine Used Tanks, Planes Against
Civilians in East {NSN N461RA6TTDS7 <go>}
* NOTE: Ukraine Says Russia Exports ‘Terrorism’ as NATO Boosts
Defenses {NSN N44IZT6S972M <go>}

+++ (FT) Resist Russia’s blackmail over Ukraine’s debt – Martin Wolf

(FT) This is barefaced cheek and such behaviour must not succeed.

A man murders his parents and then begs for the mercy of the court as a poor orphan. This is a definition of barefaced cheek. We have a new one. On a flimsy pretext, a country seizes some of a neighbour’s territory and foments a civil war in the rest. But it also insists that if a debt incurred by its ruined victim is not paid in full, it will veto the international assistance its actions have made vital. This is how Russia is behaving towards Ukraine. That, too, is barefaced cheek. It is also blackmail. Such behaviour is hardly surprising. It must not succeed.

The story is worse even than this. The loan in question — a bond with a face value of $3bn issued in December 2013 — was intended to sweeten the decision by Viktor Yanukovich, the subsequently ousted president, to reject an association agreement with the EU. Today, Russia apparently wants the international community to fund repayment in full of money advanced to cajole Ukraine into making an unnecessary choice of Russia over Europe. In reality, however, Russia wants to veto a planned $17.5bn loan from the International Monetary Fund aimed at helping the country it has sought to ruin. Legally, the IMF may not lend to a country if it is in arrears on an official loan. Russia is arguing that the bond, which it bought on terms favourable to Ukraine, was such a concessional loan. In effect, it wishes to use the leverage of this loan, to prevent its victim from being helped.

So what is to be done?

A starting point is to reject the justifications Russia feels and the reasons it advances for its hostility towards the current government of Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, seems to think that gangsters may stay in power for as long as they wish and use whatever methods they desire. We have no reason to agree. Russian propaganda suggests that the government in Kiev is a bunch of fascists. But meeting Petro Poroshenko, Ukraine’s president, makes clear that this is another “big lie”.Resist-Russia’s-blackmail-over-Ukraine’s-debt-FT

+ (BBG) Exactly How Much New Money Is EU Giving Ukraine?: Marc Champion

(BBG) How much has Europe spent to support Ukraine’s economy since Russia annexed Crimea and stoked a war to destabilize a new government in Kiev?

The short answer is, not enough. A successful financial rescue for Ukraine would make it clear, both to the Kremlin and Ukrainians, that the economy can withstand Russian pressure. The longer response is that you have to look closely to figure out what the European Union’s financial response to the crisis has really been.
According to the most recent account from the European Commission, the EU has so far disbursed 2.21 billion euros to help Ukraine with its budget — less than 1 percent of the money allocated by the euro area to bail out Greece.

There is more to come from this part of the EU’s promised aid package: two more payments of 600 million euros each, tied to Ukraine’s compliance with the International Monetary Fund’s requirements for fiscal adjustments and structural reforms (which is as it should be). The EU also offered 355 million euros to handle short-term shortfalls, and to meet the conditions of a new trade and association agreement.

cComments
Got something to say? Start the conversation and be the first to comment.
ADD A COMMENT
0

There are other big wedges of money to make up the EU’s overall pledged aid response of 11 billion euros, although here it gets squirrelly. The Commission cites, for example, a 300 million euro loan from Euratom, the EU’s agency for increasing nuclear safety on the continent. Euratom’s financing was released last month, but it was decided as long ago as 2011, when the project was unveiled and long before Russia annexed Crimea.

Don’t get me wrong. The loan is a good use of funds for the EU’s environmental security, and it’s vital to Ukraine. The country experienced the world’s worst nuclear safety disaster, at Chernobyl in 1986, and has long needed to diversify its energy mix away from Russian natural gas imports. So kudos all round. But the money was hardly a response to current crisis.
Similarly, fully 3 billion euros of the EU’s headline package comes from projects to be delivered by the European Investment Bank between 2014 and 2016. Indeed, in the roughly 17 months since the EU announced its Ukraine aid package, the EIB has signed 1.3 billion euros worth of new contracts. These cover things like water purification and sewage plants, credit lines for small and medium-sized companies, repairs to a natural-gas transit pipeline, and several projects to fix things broken during the conflict in eastern Ukraine. This is all valuable.

But do the EIB’s 3 billion euros really constitute new money delivered in response to the crisis? Or was this an existing financial fire hose? Well, in the 17 months before the EU’s March 5, 2014 announcement of the EIB program, the bank signed just over 1 billion euros worth of projects, not a huge difference and consistent with an upward trend from 600 million in the previous 17-month period.

The EU believes it is doing a lot. Add everything up and all this aid amounts to “the largest EU financial assistance package ever granted to a non-EU country in such a short time,” it says. There’s no reason to doubt the claim. At a time when Ukraine is financially bleeding, the transfusion of EU, IMF and U.S. money offered to date has prevented an even worse economic collapse. And there’s no doubt Ukraine presents a special challenge to donors: Pumping money effectively into a country with one of the most corrupt bureaucracies in the world is no simple task.

But this sets the bar too low. The EU hasn’t faced a situation as strategically grave as this since the Cold War. For the long-term health of the continent, stabilizing Ukraine and coming to agreement with Russia about the limits of its right to deploy force in the neighborhood it shares with the EU is at least as important as keeping Greece in the euro currency area.

Moreover, scrambling to make the financial response appear bigger than it really is, is as damaging as it is common. The EU cannot afford to raise and dash expectations in a country as fragile as Ukraine — one that has taken huge risks to try to integrate with the EU’s economy and its political values.

The European Commission has done what it can with the relatively little money delivered, and has sought to pad that reality by rebranding what already existed. It would do more if it had more. That, however, is up to the 28 governments of the EU’s member states. Together with the U.S., they need to do what it takes to support Ukraine’s economy.