Crisis in Ukraine

[Unhappy438]

You probably know that in the East, most buildings have central heating powered by gas. The tradition for decades has been to keep the prices very low, which conflicts with capitalist ideology. I believe poor Ukranians had it good for a long time, and now they are going to fork out more for all services.

Yes the poor have had it so good in Ukraine :erm:

 

[snoopdoggydog]

Except that Congress decides the debt, not the President. Small detail.

and if Obama doesn't get his way he threatens the US with government shutdowns and US defaulting on their debt to the world, just like last year when the US was shutdown. Small detail

 

[snoopdoggydog]

'US desperate to isolate Russia on all fronts'

The Obama administration is taking no prisoners trying to “isolate” Russia on all possible fronts – with negligible results so far.

Here I outlined some reasons why Asia won’t isolate Russia. And here some reasons why the EU cannot afford to isolate Russia. Yet the Obama administration is relentless, and bound to keep attacking on three major fronts – the G20, Iran and Syria.

First, the G20. Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop threw a balloon, speculating that Russia and President Vladimir Putin could be barred from the G20 summit in Brisbane in November.

The reaction of the other four BRICS member-nations was swift: “The custodianship of the G20 belongs to all member-states equally and no one member-state can unilaterally determine its nature and character.”

US-subservient Australia had to shut up. For now.

The BRICS, not by accident, are the key developing world alliance inside the G20, which actually discusses what matters in international relations. The G7 – which ‘expelled’ Russia from its upcoming meeting in Sochi, transferred to Brussels - is just a self-important talk shop.

Then there’s Iran. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov made it very clear that if the US and selected European minions would slap economic sanctions over the Crimea referendum, “we will take retaliatory measures as well.” And he meant it in relation to the P5+1 negotiations over the Iranian nuclear dossier.

Here’s a fairly accurate depiction of the US establishment’s view on the Russian role in the negotiations.

It’s true that the 2009 revelation of a secret, underground Iranian uranium enrichment facility did not sit well with Moscow – which in response cancelled the sale of the S-300 air defense system to Tehran.

But more crucial is the fact Moscow wants the Iranian nuclear dossier to be kept under UN Security Council umbrella – where it can exercise a veto; any solution must be multilateral, and not concocted by psychotic neo-cons.

Conflicting political factions in Iran may harbor doubts about Moscow’s commitment to a just solution – considering Moscow has not done much to alleviate the harsh sanctions package. And yes, both Russia and Iran are in competition as energy exporters – and sanctions do punish Iran and reward Russia (50 percent less Iranian oil exports since 2011, and not even qualifying as a major exporter of natural gas).

But if the American sanction obsession engulfs Russia as well, expect fireworks; as in Moscow accelerating a swap of up to 500,000 barrels a day of Iranian crude in exchange for Russia building another nuclear power plant; extra Russian moves busting the Western sanctions wall; and even Moscow deciding to sell not only the S-300 but the S-400 or the ultra-sophisticated, upcoming S-500 air defense system to Tehran.

Finally there’s Syria. Once again, the BRICS are at the forefront. Russian Ambassador-at-Large Vadim Lukov nailed it when he stressed, “Frankly speaking, without the BRICS position, Syria would have long ago turned into Libya.”

The BRICS learned their lesson for Syria when they let their abstentions at a UN vote open the way for NATO’s humanitarian bombing of Libya into a failed state. Subsequently, Russian diplomacy intervened to save the Obama administration from bombing Syria over a senseless, self-inflicted ‘red line’ – with potentially cataclysmic consequences.

Now the plot is thickening again. UN and Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi has spun that the resumption of the Geneva II peace talks is “out of the question” for the moment. In a briefing to the UN Security Council in early March, he blamed the Syrian government for this.

That’s absurd. The myriad, bickering, opportunistic opposition factions never wanted a negotiation in the first place; only regime change. Not to mention the jihadi nebulae – whic until recently has been imposing facts on the ground fully weaponized by Gulf petrodollar funds.

Now rumors abound of the Obama administration getting ready to ‘isolate’ Russia – and by extension the BRICS - on Syria.

The Obama administration, via proverbial unnamed ‘officials’, has been positioning disinformation ‘reports’ about jihadists attacking Western interests, based out of north and northeast Syria. That could be the prelude for a perfect false flag, then used to justify a Western intervention – obviously bypassing the UN. Those warmongering dreamers of a no-fly zone over Syria have never stopped dreaming.

This scenario also neatly dovetails with the current Erdogan administration scandal in Turkey – as what was unveiled on YouTube is exactly a national security conversation on how a NATO member, Turkey, could set up a false flag and blame Syria.

The bottom line is that NATO has far from given up on regime change in Syria. There are enticing symmetries at play. A putsch in Ukraine. A false flag in Syria. A NATO push in Syria? A Russian push in eastern Ukraine. It may not sound as far-fetched as it seems. And then, all bets are off.

The whole New Great Game in Eurasia is getting so warped that now we have constitutional law expert Obama legitimizing the invasion and occupation of Iraq (“America sought to work within the international system, we did not claim or annex Iraq’s territory”) and wacko warmongers in Think Tankland preaching an oil embargo against Russia, Iran-style, with Washington using their minions Saudi Arabia to make up for the shortfall.

After lecturing Europeans in The Hague and Brussels over ‘evil’ Russian designs, and parading in Rome like a New Caesar, Obama finishes his triumphal tour exactly at his Saudi satrapy. We should all get ready for a nasty box of chocolates ahead.

http://rt.com/op-edge/us-desperate-to-isolate-russia-893/

 

[snoopdoggydog]

If Obama removes "I" from his vocabulary he will have nothing to say

 

[w1z4rd]

and if Obama doesn't get his way he threatens the US with government shutdowns and US defaulting on their debt to the world, just like last year when the US was shutdown. Small detail

Thats not what happened. That was Ted Cruz (and the far right tea party libertarian Republicans) who shut down government. You are totally misrepresenting what happened.

 

[Nanfeishen]

Pretty much, its to facilitate the collection of debt servicing obligations. They are doing that by raising gas prices, so Nanfeishen has that one a little backwards.

So you saying the people in Ukraine are not going to get shafted by this deal ?

That phase out of gas subsidies and 79% increase in gas prices means a $13 billion cut in real consumption over two years, 2014-15. That $13 billion reduces the remaining $21 billion of the IMF package still further, leaving only $8 billion in potential net remaining stimulus for the real economy from the IMF deal. However, that’s still not the entire picture of the IMF deal negative impact on the Ukrainian economy.

The IMF deal also calls for ‘Fiscal Policy’ reforms, or what it calls the need to “implement deeper fiscal adjustment” that will “reduce the fiscal deficit to around 2.5% of GDP by 2016.” That 2.5% budget cut represents another $4.5 billion in combined annual Ukrainian government spending cuts (and/or tax hikes), presumably in each of the next two years.

The spending cuts will no doubt come out of government job reductions and wage cuts for remaining government workers. It will also undoubtedly include deep cuts to the pension system affecting all retirees, which some estimate will mean cuts in pensions by up to 50% by 2016. It is possible that the $4.5 to $9 billion in government deficit reduction over the next 1 to 2 years will mean sales tax hikes for consumer households as taxes are cut for businesses, since the IMF statement of March 27 also calls for “measures to facilitate VAT (value added tax) refunds to businesses”.

In its March 27 statement the IMF has not spelled out the required job, wage, and pension cuts specifically. It is clearly waiting for the Ukrainian interim government to inflict those economic wounds on itself and the Ukrainian people, following which the IMF Management and Executive Board will approve the offered deal.

To summarize, the IMF deal of March 27 calls for paying western banks and lenders $6.5 billion over the next two years in debt servicing payments. It additionally requires the reduction of household gas subsidies by another $13 billion plus the total phase out of gas subsidies. And it indirectly calls for the Ukrainian government to cut spending by at least $8 billion (2.5% of GDP) over the next two years—in the form of cuts in government jobs, wage cuts for government workers, and pension payment reductions of a likely 50% for retirees in general.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/28/ukraines-imf-deal/

In essence an illegitimate bunch of con artist politicians have just sold the Ukraine and its people , lock stock and barrel to the IMF , EU and US for pocket change.
They just swopped masters, gained nothing and lost any chance of being free and independant.

 

[Taranis]

Most buildings in the UK have central heating powered by gas. This is actually common throughout most of Europe, west and east.

True but not state subsidised.

They will be very unhappy if they suddenly get heating at commercial levels. Same applies to telecomms and other utilities.

 

[snoopdoggydog]

Thats not what happened. That was Ted Cruz (and the far right tea party libertarian Republicans) who shut down government. You are totally misrepresenting what happened.

Obama chose to have the US government shutdown and default on it's debt if he never got his way. How am I misrepresenting what happened?

 

[snoopdoggydog]

Obama is right a big country can't bully small ones...

China 1945-46

Korea 1950-53

China 1950-53

Guatemala 1954

Indonesia 1958

Cuba 1959-60

Guatemala 1960

Belgian Congo 1964

Guatemala 1964

Dominican Republic 1965-66

Peru 1965

Laos 1964-73

Vietnam 1961-73

Cambodia 1969-70

Guatemala 1967-69

Lebanon 1982-84

Grenada 1983-84

Libya 1986

El Salvador 1981-92

Nicaragua 1981-90

Iran 1987-88

Libya 1989

Panama 1989-90

Iraq 1991

Kuwait 1991

Somalia 1992-94

Bosnia 1995

Iran 1998

Sudan 1998

Afghanistan 1998

Yugoslavia – Serbia 1999

Afghanistan 2001

Libya 2011

 

[Dave]

PUTIN SAYS CRIMEA SHOWED 'NEW CAPACITIES' OF RUSSIAN ARMY

President Vladimir Putin on Friday congratulated the Russian armed forces for their role in the takeover by Moscow of Crimea from Ukraine, saying they had showed the new capacities of the Russian army.

"The recent events in Crimea were a serious test. They demonstrated the new capacities of our armed forces in terms of quality and the high moral spirit of the personnel," he said, quoted by Russian news agencies, for the first time confirming the direct involvement of the Russian army in the seizure.


Source : Sapa-AFP /nsm
Date : 28 Mar 2014 13:31

So Putin's lies about the Russian army not being deployed throughout Crimea have now been acknowledged as lies by Putin himself...

 

[Hamish McPanji]

So Putin's lies about the Russian army not being deployed throughout Crimea have now been acknowledged as lies by Putin himself...

Yet, look at the graphic, explains a lot

 

[w1z4rd]

Obama chose to have the US government shutdown and default on it's debt if he never got his way. How am I misrepresenting what happened?

By blaming it on Obama you are misrepresenting the data. I have already highlighted this. The shutdown was caused by Ted Cruz. Not even the moderate Republicans agreed with the Tea Party far right strategy. Congress controls the purse, congress is Republican controlled.

 

[snoopdoggydog]

So Putin's lies about the Russian army not being deployed throughout Crimea have now been acknowledged as lies by Putin himself...

Better than Obama lying about his meeting with the Pope

 

[snoopdoggydog]

By blaming it on Obama you are misrepresenting the data. I have already highlighted this. The shutdown was caused by Ted Cruz. Not even the moderate Republicans agreed with the Tea Party far right strategy. Congress controls the purse, congress is Republican controlled.

You would have us believe the leader of the free world who can threaten any country on this planet with sanctions or "DEMOCRACY" couldn't do anything about 1 person in his own country that he is president of? You can't be serious. Not the "YES WE CAN" man

 

[w1z4rd]

You would have us believe the leader of the free world who can threaten any country on this planet with sanctions or "DEMOCRACY" couldn't do anything about 1 person in his own country that he is president of? You can't be serious. Not the "YES WE CAN" man

Im guessing you dont know how the American government functions. Congress is the purse holder and it is Republican controlled. The American government is balanced by 3 spheres of government. Congress, Senate and the Presidency. Congress controls the purse. No. Obama is not a dictator and cant force congress (controlled by an irrational opposition hellbent on making him look bad) to do his bidding. Sorry to disappoint.

 

[Unhappy438]

So you saying the people in Ukraine are not going to get shafted by this deal ?

Nope, im not attempting to predict how it will end for Ukraine financially either way. What i do know is that you cant look at it with a narrow view, just because gas prices have been increased doesn't automatically spell trouble for Ukraine.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Obama chose to have the US government shutdown and default on it's debt if he never got his way. How am I misrepresenting what happened?

He's not the one that shut down (or threatened to shut down) the government and he didn't threaten a default on their debt. Ghoti is right, you are misrepresenting the situation. You seem to have an irrational hatred of Obama.

So Putin's lies about the Russian army not being deployed throughout Crimea have now been acknowledged as lies by Putin himself...

Yep.

 

[snoopdoggydog]

In a TV address to his divided nation, Ukraine's PM Yatsenyuk stunned the people by first suggesting heating prices would rise gradually, then confirming a plan that will see prices rise 100% in the next 2 years (and almost 200% by 2017) as the cost of imported Russian gas is expected to be around $500 (up from the current $84). This standard of living crushing move was then followed by tougher capital controls, restricting cash purchases to around $1300 per person per day after the Central bank basically admitted "amid a tense situation in money markets" it was broke. And all of this comes on the heels of what can only be described as a vague pro-forma comment by US and EU governments over the riots by the "Right Sector" ultranationalists that clearly did not want to upset the state-sponsored thugs too much.

 

[DJ...]

Obama chose to have the US government shutdown and default on it's debt if he never got his way. How am I misrepresenting what happened?

That's not even remotely what happened...

 

[w1z4rd]

Killadoobs latest reincarnation //sigh

Anyways, I see most of the world voted sensibly. I cant believe how different this vote was from the Georgia vote. The Georgia resolution was adopted with a 14 votes in favor, 11 against and 105 abstentions. This Ukrainian one was overwhelmingly adopted by the world with 100 votes in favor, 11 against and 58 abstentions.

Exclusive: Russia threatened countries ahead of UN vote on Ukraine - envoys

(Reuters) - Russia threatened several Eastern European and Central Asian states with retaliation if they voted in favor of a United Nations General Assembly resolution this week declaring invalid Crimea's referendum on seceding from Ukraine, U.N. diplomats said.

The disclosures about Russian threats came after Moscow accused Western countries of using "shameless pressure, up to the point of political blackmail and economic threats," in an attempt to coerce the United Nations' 193 member states to join it in supporting the non-binding resolution on the Ukraine crisis.

According to interviews with U.N. diplomats, most of whom preferred to speak on condition of anonymity for fear of angering Moscow, the targets of Russian threats included Moldova, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan as well as a number of African countries.

A spokesman for Russia's Mission to the U.N. denied that Moscow threatened any country with retaliation if it supported the resolution, saying: "We never threaten anyone. We just explain the situation."

According to the diplomats, the Russian threats were not specific. But they said it was clear to the recipients of the warnings not to support the resolution that retaliatory measures could include steps such as expelling migrant workers from Russia, halting natural gas supplies or banning certain imports to Russia to cause economic harm.

In the end, the Ukrainian resolution declaring Crimea's vote on March 16 in favor of seceding from Ukraine as having "no validity" passed with 100 votes in favor, 11 against and 58 abstentions. Another 24 U.N. member states did not cast votes.

Western diplomats called the result a diplomatic success for Ukraine. A similar General Assembly vote was held in 2008 after Russia went to war with Georgia over its breakaway enclave South Ossetia, which later declared independence and has unsuccessfully sought annexation to Russia. That resolution was adopted with a mere 14 votes in favor, 11 against and 105 abstentions.

Although the General Assembly resolution is non-binding - unlike Security Council resolutions - Russia and the Western powers went to great efforts to persuade delegations to vote with them. Earlier this month, Russia vetoed a resolution in the Security Council that was similar to the General Assembly text.

The United States and European delegations said the result of Thursday's vote highlighted Russia's isolation on the issue of Crimea.

Ukraine's former President Viktor Yanukovich, backed by Russia, was ousted last month after a crackdown on demonstrations in Kiev that left dozens dead. His ousting prompted Moscow to seize the peninsula on the Black Sea in a move that predominantly Russian-speaking Crimeans embraced in their plebiscite that overwhelmingly favored annexation to Russia.

DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW

The delegations of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan did not respond to a request from Reuters for comment about the alleged Russian threats of retaliation. Both countries were among the 24 countries that did not cast votes on Wednesday.

But the Ambassador of Moldova to the U.N., Vladimir Lupan, agreed to speak about the issue. Asked if the Russians had given any indication, direct or indirect, that the former Soviet republic could be punished for a yes vote, Lupan said: "I wasn't present at this particular discussion and I can neither infer nor confirm this to you."

"And normally before you vote, you discuss this with a number of countries," he told Reuters. "This matter was indeed discussed between the Moldovan authorities and the Russian authorities. We also discussed this with our (European Union) partners."

"Of course, we had two different points of view - one from the Russian Federation in favor of a no vote and, for example, the European Union in favor of a positive vote," Lupan said, adding that his country was attempting to resolve all outstanding issues with Russia peacefully and through dialogue.

Several diplomats told Reuters that Moldova was among the countries subjected to pressure from Moscow ahead of the vote. In the end, the Moldovan delegation defied Russia and joined Ukraine, the United States, the EU and other Western powers in voting yes.

Lupan also said the West had not threatened Moldova.

Moldova is in a precarious situation as its pro-Europe leader warned in an interview with Reuters of "a series of provocations" from breakaway Russian-speaking Transdniestria, which has been identified by NATO as a possible next target for Russia after it sent troops into Ukraine.

Moldovan Prime Minister Iurie Leanca told Reuters that Russia's annexation of Ukraine's Crimean peninsula "might raise expectations" in Moldova's rebel region, a sliver of land that broke away with the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s.

Some African diplomats also did not respond to queries, but Rwanda's deputy U.N. ambassador, Olivier Nduhungirehe, vehemently denied that Kigali was threatened. "I don't know where this came from," he told Reuters.

Ivory Coast's Ambassador Youssoufou Bamba also denied being pressured by Moscow.

Like many African states, Rwanda abstained from the vote, while Ivory Coast did not participate.

Russia is not the only country accused of strong-arm tactics at the United Nations. Ahead of important decisions on the 15-member U.N. Security Council, diplomats say the big powers have been known to attempt to "buy" votes from the 10 non-permanent members with a combination of carrots and sticks.

The United States, diplomats say, has in the past punished countries that refused to stand with it on the Security Council for crucial votes. After Yemen voted against a council resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq in 1991 to expel it from Kuwait, Washington cut off millions of dollars in aid to Sanaa.

French Ambassador Gerard Araud was asked about Russia's allegation that Western powers had blackmailed U.N. member states to secure a strong vote in favor of the Crimea text.

"When you lose, you have to be a good a loser," he told reporters outside the Security Council. "I think Russia is a bad loser. They lost and they did by 100 votes."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/28/us-ukraine-crisis-un-idUSBREA2R20O20140328

The world has spoken.