Russia declares war on Ukraine. Live updates from inside Ukraine

WASHINGTON: Vice President Joe Biden has said the United States strongly supports negotiations among Ukraine, Russia and international diplomats to resolve the crisis in Ukraine.

The White House said that Biden spoke by phone on Wednesday with Ukraine's new president, Petro Poroshenko. It was their second conversation in two days.

The White House also said that Poroshenko told Biden that he's still committed to his offer to grant amnesty to insurgents who lay down their arms or allow them to return to Russia.

Biden told Poroshenko that the US applauds the peace plan he presented on Saturday during his inauguration.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com...

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: letscit
The Baltic Sea and skies are getting crowded as Russia launches military training of its assault forces in the exclave of Kaliningrad in answer to the double war-games being conducted by joint NATO forces on the territory of the three Baltic States.

Tanks, troops, jets: NATO countries launch full-scale war games in Baltic

NATO’s decision to conduct dual war games next to Russian borders in the Baltic has not been left unaddressed by Russia’s Defense Ministry, which prepared a surprise training of first strike forces – marines, paratroopers and long-range bombers - right in the backyard of the NATO military maneuvers.

“We conduct military training simultaneously with the international war games that have started in Europe, Saber Strike-2014 and BALTOPS-2014,” said the ministry’s press service.

Defense Ministry noted that the military might engaged in training in the Kaliningrad Region is by all means comparable with the NATO’s forces concentrated on the nearby territory of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, where Saber Strike-2014 is conducted on June 9-20 and sea-based BALTOPS-2014 training held in the Baltic on June 6-21.

The Russian maneuvers involve the use of naval groups, marines, landing operations of airborne forces, air defense training and firing exercise of front-line aviation.

“All-arms naval groups will maintain border and sea communication defense, and will perform training to search and destroy hypothetical aggressor’s submarines and combat ships,” the ministry commented to RBC news outlet.

The paratrooper division from Pskov will be training operational deployment to Kaliningrad, whereas marines will be training defending the coastal line from possible sea-borne landing and will also perform isolation and elimination of illegal armed groups.

The Air Force is to provide fire support with Su-34 fighter-bombers and Mi-24 assault helicopters.

Deployment of supersonic Tu-22M3 long-range strategic maritime strike bombers, some of which have just the day before finished training in the Black Sea, has also been announced. Together with the air defense forces they will patrol the area to make sure the airspace of the training is securely sealed off.

NATO’s training in the Baltic is an annual event yet this time the number of troops taking part has been augmented considerably. In 2013 there were 1,800 troops involved, while Saber Strike 2014 has become the largest-ever, with 4,700 troops and over 800 military vehicles, such as M2 Bradley, M1126 Stryker, and various APCs: XA-180, XA-202 and M113 taking part in the training.

Besides the two NATO war-games, the Baltic States are holding Baltic Host 2014 military cooperation training of their own near Riga.

Saber Strike 2014 has hosted troops from Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Great Britain, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and the US.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has already dubbed even the rotational military build-up near the Russian borders as an act of hostility directly violating the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997, Lavrov’s First Deputy Vladimir Titov told Interfax.

With the background of developments in Ukraine, the beef-up of NATO’s military presence near Russian borders, “just like during the 08.08.08 war in the North Caucasus, it rather creates additional problems instead of helping to solve them, Titov said.

On Monday Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said after meeting his Finnish counterpart Erkki Tuomioja that, “The artificial attempt to continue NATO's eastward expansion, progression of the military infrastructure to the east, closer to Russia's borders, is counterproductive.”

rt.com...

Im betting NATO changes the theme of this one usually its a middle east country as the enemy betting they pick a european one this time. Bet they model the force after Russia so NATO will be fighting Russian equipment. Amazing Putin making friends all over the world.

US/NATO better get ready to get back to Iraq. Looks like their buddies lost in Syria and now they are focusing on Iraq.
I am not sure that was the White House plan.

originally posted by: GargIndia
a reply to: dragonridr

Your link does not work.

There are always paid propagandists in any war - on both sides.

Propagandists do not determine the outcome of the war.

I predict Russia will win the war in Ukraine.

The losses will be high - both civilian and military on both sides. Russian civilian losses are high due to participation of mercenaries from Poland etc.

So your saying Russia is at war with Ukraine see thats contradictory to Putins statements. As far as combat no Ukrainians are going to send home many dead Russians its a lose lose for Russia. Bottom line Putin has destroyed the Russian economy over his idea of an eastern Europe coalition. Hes pushed the remaining countries running to NATO destroyed his trade with Europe. If this was planned by NATO like Russia claims they obviously got Russia to fall for it hook line and sinker. Couldnt have worked out better for NATO a bunch of new members increased budgets and lets not forget further control of europe. In truth i dont think NATO planned anything i think Putin just handed them this gift do to paranoia.

originally posted by: cosmonova

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: letscit
The Baltic Sea and skies are getting crowded as Russia launches military training of its assault forces in the exclave of Kaliningrad in answer to the double war-games being conducted by joint NATO forces on the territory of the three Baltic States.

Tanks, troops, jets: NATO countries launch full-scale war games in Baltic

NATO’s decision to conduct dual war games next to Russian borders in the Baltic has not been left unaddressed by Russia’s Defense Ministry, which prepared a surprise training of first strike forces – marines, paratroopers and long-range bombers - right in the backyard of the NATO military maneuvers.

“We conduct military training simultaneously with the international war games that have started in Europe, Saber Strike-2014 and BALTOPS-2014,” said the ministry’s press service.

Defense Ministry noted that the military might engaged in training in the Kaliningrad Region is by all means comparable with the NATO’s forces concentrated on the nearby territory of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, where Saber Strike-2014 is conducted on June 9-20 and sea-based BALTOPS-2014 training held in the Baltic on June 6-21.

The Russian maneuvers involve the use of naval groups, marines, landing operations of airborne forces, air defense training and firing exercise of front-line aviation.

“All-arms naval groups will maintain border and sea communication defense, and will perform training to search and destroy hypothetical aggressor’s submarines and combat ships,” the ministry commented to RBC news outlet.

The paratrooper division from Pskov will be training operational deployment to Kaliningrad, whereas marines will be training defending the coastal line from possible sea-borne landing and will also perform isolation and elimination of illegal armed groups.

The Air Force is to provide fire support with Su-34 fighter-bombers and Mi-24 assault helicopters.

Deployment of supersonic Tu-22M3 long-range strategic maritime strike bombers, some of which have just the day before finished training in the Black Sea, has also been announced. Together with the air defense forces they will patrol the area to make sure the airspace of the training is securely sealed off.

NATO’s training in the Baltic is an annual event yet this time the number of troops taking part has been augmented considerably. In 2013 there were 1,800 troops involved, while Saber Strike 2014 has become the largest-ever, with 4,700 troops and over 800 military vehicles, such as M2 Bradley, M1126 Stryker, and various APCs: XA-180, XA-202 and M113 taking part in the training.

Besides the two NATO war-games, the Baltic States are holding Baltic Host 2014 military cooperation training of their own near Riga.

Saber Strike 2014 has hosted troops from Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Great Britain, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and the US.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has already dubbed even the rotational military build-up near the Russian borders as an act of hostility directly violating the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997, Lavrov’s First Deputy Vladimir Titov told Interfax.

With the background of developments in Ukraine, the beef-up of NATO’s military presence near Russian borders, “just like during the 08.08.08 war in the North Caucasus, it rather creates additional problems instead of helping to solve them, Titov said.

On Monday Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said after meeting his Finnish counterpart Erkki Tuomioja that, “The artificial attempt to continue NATO's eastward expansion, progression of the military infrastructure to the east, closer to Russia's borders, is counterproductive.”

rt.com...

Im betting NATO changes the theme of this one usually its a middle east country as the enemy betting they pick a european one this time. Bet they model the force after Russia so NATO will be fighting Russian equipment. Amazing Putin making friends all over the world.

US/NATO better get ready to get back to Iraq. Looks like their buddies lost in Syria and now they are focusing on Iraq.
I am not sure that was the White House plan.

NATO was never in Iraq wow you really dont keep up do you?

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: cosmonova

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: letscit
The Baltic Sea and skies are getting crowded as Russia launches military training of its assault forces in the exclave of Kaliningrad in answer to the double war-games being conducted by joint NATO forces on the territory of the three Baltic States.

Tanks, troops, jets: NATO countries launch full-scale war games in Baltic

NATO’s decision to conduct dual war games next to Russian borders in the Baltic has not been left unaddressed by Russia’s Defense Ministry, which prepared a surprise training of first strike forces – marines, paratroopers and long-range bombers - right in the backyard of the NATO military maneuvers.

“We conduct military training simultaneously with the international war games that have started in Europe, Saber Strike-2014 and BALTOPS-2014,” said the ministry’s press service.

Defense Ministry noted that the military might engaged in training in the Kaliningrad Region is by all means comparable with the NATO’s forces concentrated on the nearby territory of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, where Saber Strike-2014 is conducted on June 9-20 and sea-based BALTOPS-2014 training held in the Baltic on June 6-21.

The Russian maneuvers involve the use of naval groups, marines, landing operations of airborne forces, air defense training and firing exercise of front-line aviation.

“All-arms naval groups will maintain border and sea communication defense, and will perform training to search and destroy hypothetical aggressor’s submarines and combat ships,” the ministry commented to RBC news outlet.

The paratrooper division from Pskov will be training operational deployment to Kaliningrad, whereas marines will be training defending the coastal line from possible sea-borne landing and will also perform isolation and elimination of illegal armed groups.

The Air Force is to provide fire support with Su-34 fighter-bombers and Mi-24 assault helicopters.

Deployment of supersonic Tu-22M3 long-range strategic maritime strike bombers, some of which have just the day before finished training in the Black Sea, has also been announced. Together with the air defense forces they will patrol the area to make sure the airspace of the training is securely sealed off.

NATO’s training in the Baltic is an annual event yet this time the number of troops taking part has been augmented considerably. In 2013 there were 1,800 troops involved, while Saber Strike 2014 has become the largest-ever, with 4,700 troops and over 800 military vehicles, such as M2 Bradley, M1126 Stryker, and various APCs: XA-180, XA-202 and M113 taking part in the training.

Besides the two NATO war-games, the Baltic States are holding Baltic Host 2014 military cooperation training of their own near Riga.

Saber Strike 2014 has hosted troops from Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Great Britain, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and the US.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has already dubbed even the rotational military build-up near the Russian borders as an act of hostility directly violating the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997, Lavrov’s First Deputy Vladimir Titov told Interfax.

With the background of developments in Ukraine, the beef-up of NATO’s military presence near Russian borders, “just like during the 08.08.08 war in the North Caucasus, it rather creates additional problems instead of helping to solve them, Titov said.

On Monday Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said after meeting his Finnish counterpart Erkki Tuomioja that, “The artificial attempt to continue NATO's eastward expansion, progression of the military infrastructure to the east, closer to Russia's borders, is counterproductive.”

rt.com...

Im betting NATO changes the theme of this one usually its a middle east country as the enemy betting they pick a european one this time. Bet they model the force after Russia so NATO will be fighting Russian equipment. Amazing Putin making friends all over the world.

US/NATO better get ready to get back to Iraq. Looks like their buddies lost in Syria and now they are focusing on Iraq.
I am not sure that was the White House plan.

NATO was never in Iraq wow you really dont keep up do you?

must be Russia and China than. Sorry my bad. You better start packing.

The Alliance demonstrated its commitment to helping Iraq create effective armed forces and, ultimately, provide for its own security by establishing the NATO Training Mission-Iraq (NTM-I) in 2004. It was withdrawn from Iraq on 31 December 2011 when the mandate of the mission expired and agreement could not be reached on the legal status of NATO troops operating in the country.

www.nato.int...

originally posted by: cosmonova

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: cosmonova

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: letscit
The Baltic Sea and skies are getting crowded as Russia launches military training of its assault forces in the exclave of Kaliningrad in answer to the double war-games being conducted by joint NATO forces on the territory of the three Baltic States.

Tanks, troops, jets: NATO countries launch full-scale war games in Baltic

NATO’s decision to conduct dual war games next to Russian borders in the Baltic has not been left unaddressed by Russia’s Defense Ministry, which prepared a surprise training of first strike forces – marines, paratroopers and long-range bombers - right in the backyard of the NATO military maneuvers.

“We conduct military training simultaneously with the international war games that have started in Europe, Saber Strike-2014 and BALTOPS-2014,” said the ministry’s press service.

Defense Ministry noted that the military might engaged in training in the Kaliningrad Region is by all means comparable with the NATO’s forces concentrated on the nearby territory of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, where Saber Strike-2014 is conducted on June 9-20 and sea-based BALTOPS-2014 training held in the Baltic on June 6-21.

The Russian maneuvers involve the use of naval groups, marines, landing operations of airborne forces, air defense training and firing exercise of front-line aviation.

“All-arms naval groups will maintain border and sea communication defense, and will perform training to search and destroy hypothetical aggressor’s submarines and combat ships,” the ministry commented to RBC news outlet.

The paratrooper division from Pskov will be training operational deployment to Kaliningrad, whereas marines will be training defending the coastal line from possible sea-borne landing and will also perform isolation and elimination of illegal armed groups.

The Air Force is to provide fire support with Su-34 fighter-bombers and Mi-24 assault helicopters.

Deployment of supersonic Tu-22M3 long-range strategic maritime strike bombers, some of which have just the day before finished training in the Black Sea, has also been announced. Together with the air defense forces they will patrol the area to make sure the airspace of the training is securely sealed off.

NATO’s training in the Baltic is an annual event yet this time the number of troops taking part has been augmented considerably. In 2013 there were 1,800 troops involved, while Saber Strike 2014 has become the largest-ever, with 4,700 troops and over 800 military vehicles, such as M2 Bradley, M1126 Stryker, and various APCs: XA-180, XA-202 and M113 taking part in the training.

Besides the two NATO war-games, the Baltic States are holding Baltic Host 2014 military cooperation training of their own near Riga.

Saber Strike 2014 has hosted troops from Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Great Britain, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and the US.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has already dubbed even the rotational military build-up near the Russian borders as an act of hostility directly violating the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997, Lavrov’s First Deputy Vladimir Titov told Interfax.

With the background of developments in Ukraine, the beef-up of NATO’s military presence near Russian borders, “just like during the 08.08.08 war in the North Caucasus, it rather creates additional problems instead of helping to solve them, Titov said.

On Monday Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said after meeting his Finnish counterpart Erkki Tuomioja that, “The artificial attempt to continue NATO's eastward expansion, progression of the military infrastructure to the east, closer to Russia's borders, is counterproductive.”

rt.com...

Im betting NATO changes the theme of this one usually its a middle east country as the enemy betting they pick a european one this time. Bet they model the force after Russia so NATO will be fighting Russian equipment. Amazing Putin making friends all over the world.

US/NATO better get ready to get back to Iraq. Looks like their buddies lost in Syria and now they are focusing on Iraq.
I am not sure that was the White House plan.

NATO was never in Iraq wow you really dont keep up do you?

must be Russia and China than. Sorry my bad. You better start packing.

The Alliance demonstrated its commitment to helping Iraq create effective armed forces and, ultimately, provide for its own security by establishing the NATO Training Mission-Iraq (NTM-I) in 2004. It was withdrawn from Iraq on 31 December 2011 when the mandate of the mission expired and agreement could not be reached on the legal status of NATO troops operating in the country.

www.nato.int...

Ok did you even realize the scope of that training 30 instructors near baghdad taught police i know i was actually near there. Ran through about 100 police officers every 30 days. I guess if they have to send 30 guys back to Iraq i think theyll be ok your knowledge of world events is extremely skewed to much Russian media?

still don't understand how people can sit here and act as though this never happened. they where caught with their hand in the cookie jar. now, what would you tell your child if you caught them with hand in cookie jar, with recorded proof and they still denied it?



is it too much to ask for a little common sense?

Putin making another mistake if i was Ukraine i would make sure Russian gas supplies are cut off im really surprised hes giving Ukraine this option.

(Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin accused Ukraine on Wednesday of forcing gas talks into a "dead end" by rejecting the offer of a cut in duty to resolve a price dispute that threatens supplies not just to Ukraine but to the rest of Europe.

Talks ended with Kiev demanding contract changes to bring down the highest prices in Europe for Russian gas supplies, and Moscow suggesting its proposed cut of about one-fifth to around $385 per 1,000 cubic metres was its final offer.

Further negotiations could take place by phone before Monday, when Moscow has threatened to halt supplies.

reuters

originally posted by: letscit
still don't understand how people can sit here and act as though this never happened. they where caught with their hand in the cookie jar. now, what would you tell your child if you caught them with hand in cookie jar, with recorded proof and they still denied it?

is it too much to ask for a little common sense?

Really you dont think countries discuss things when revolutions occur? But notice nothing they wanted actually occurred did it? So i guess if they were in charge they seem to not had much control of the situation. So how could they be manipulating the situation and apparently not have anything go the way they planned? Makes more sense they were discussing the scenarios they thought should be likely. See in English context is everything.

a reply to: dragonridr

Bottom line Putin has destroyed the Russian economy over his idea of an eastern Europe coalition. Hes pushed the remaining countries running to NATO destroyed his trade with Europe. If this was planned by NATO like Russia claims they obviously got Russia to fall for it hook line and sinker.

Even US corporations are fleeing the dollar Titanic

The U.S. dollar is being increasingly dropped as the currency for settling international trade. But perhaps the latest trend provides the most startling evidence yet that the dollar is doomed as the world reserve currency.

The Financial Times reported today that U.S. corporations are using the Chinese renminbi to buy imports over three times more than they had the previous year:
China's renminbi is rapidly displacing the US dollar as a trading currency not only in Asia and Europe but now also in the US home market.

The value of renminbi payments between the US and the rest of the world rose by 327 per cent in April this year from the same month a year ago (see chart) as more US corporations switched to using the Chinese currency to pay for imports from China, according to data from SWIFT, the international currency settlement firm.

First, US importers can slash the cost of imports from China by agreeing to trade in renminbi rather than US dollars, Lodge said. Second, a recent surge in the popularity of a host of renminbi-denominated financial market instruments are making it easier for US corporates both to hedge currency risk and to earn an investment return from the renminbi they hold.

U.S. corporations are just following the global trend where the largest economies in the world are jumping from the dollar Titanic. Last April, the world's 12th-ranked economy, Australia, joined a growing list of nations that have agreed to bypass the dollar in bilateral trade with China. China, ranked 2nd behind the U.S., also has similar agreements with Japan (3rd), Brazil (6th), India (9th), and Russia (10th).

Further, the BRICS nations appear ready to shake up the 'world order' with the deployment of their own development bank as reported today by Al Jazeera:
After more than six decades of dictating development policy in much of the emerging world, the Western-led International Monetary Fund and World Bank may soon have some competition.

The BRICS nations - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - are reportedly close to finalizing their long-awaited development bank and currency reserve, each valued at $100 billion, in what has been billed as a historic challenge by the world's emerging economies to a global financial architecture that has been dominated by the U.S. and Western Europe since its post - World War II inception.
The IMF and World Bank also appear to be pushing for a global economic "reset". "We need to push the reset button. The world is still much too much caught in a crisis-management mode," said Klaus Schwab founder of the World Economic Forum earlier this year.

A sentiment echoed by IMF head Christine Lagarde during the same event:

It's only been on year since China formally called for a new global currency citing similar concerns, as reported by the Associated Press:
China is calling for a global currency to replace the dominant dollar, showing a growing assertiveness on revamping the world economy ahead of next week's London summit on the financial crisis.

The surprise proposal by Beijing's central bank governor reflects unease about its vast holdings of U.S. government bonds and adds to Chinese pressure to overhaul a global financial system dominated by the dollar and Western governments. Both the United States and the European Union brushed off the idea.

The world economic crisis shows the "inherent vulnerabilities and systemic risks in the existing international monetary system," Gov. Zhou Xiaochuan
Additionally, in the midst of this global currency shakeup former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker has hinted at a new Bretton Woods to prevent "destructive financial crisis."

Volcker said in his Bretton Woods speech this past May:
Was the exorbitant privilege of the dollar as a reserve currency also a dangerous temptation to procrastinate - an impediment to timely policy adjustments, risking eventual breakdown?....

A new Bretton Woods conference? We are long ways from that. But surely events have raised, whether we want to admit it or not, some fundamental questions that have been ignored for decades.
Maybe the reset is happening right in front of us. If U.S. companies choose to abandon dollars for imports, the dollar is in very big trouble, and China may get their wish of a new global currency after all - the renminbi.


the problem I have with all this is, I am just an ordinary-hard working American citizen with a family who cant make ends meet now. wtf is to happen in a couple of years. time for me to definitely flee the population areas.

www.activistpost.com... for-chinese.html

Who's winning the battle for Ukraine? Despite continued signs of trouble in Ukraine's eastern provinces, some pretty prominent people have recently offered a decidedly upbeat interpretation of events there. The first was U.S. President Barack Obama, who, during his commencement speech at West Point last week, cited the Western response to the crisis as a telling example of successful multilateral diplomacy. In his words, "the mobilization of world opinion and international institutions served as a counterweight to Russian propaganda, Russian troops on the borders, and armed militias." It's not over, he warned, but this effort "has given a chance for the Ukrainian people to choose their future."

A second optimistic appraisal came from New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, who announced on May 27 that Vladimir Putin had "blinked" and proclaimed that the Russian leader "got pretty much everything wrong." According to Friedman, "Putin's seizure of Crimea has weakened the Russian economy, led to China getting a bargain gas deal, revived NATO, spurred Europe to start ending its addiction to Russian gas and begun a debate across Europe about increasing defense spending." His close-to-gleeful summary: "the country Putin threatens most today is Russia."

There's a grain of truth in these optimistic assessments, in the sense that Russia has paid a price for its recent actions. And Obama and Friedman are correct to remind us that Russia is not the looming geopolitical threat that some hawks tried to conjure up when it seized Crimea. But what both Obama and Friedman miss is the real -- and completely normal --motivation behind Putin's behavior. It ain't rocket science: Putin was willing to pay a substantial price because Russia's vital interests were at stake. On balance, I'll bet Putin still sees this matter as a net win.

Just consider what Putin has achieved in the past few months.

First, he has put the idea of a further NATO expansion on the back burner for a long time, and maybe forever. Russia has opposed NATO's march eastward ever since it began in the mid-1990s, but Russia was not in a position to do much about it. The brief 2008 war between Russia and Georgia was Putin's first attempt to draw a red line, and that minor skirmish dampened enthusiasm for expansion considerably. This time around, Putin made it abundantly clear that any future attempt to bring Ukraine into NATO or even into EU membership will be met with firm Russian opposition and will probably lead to dismemberment of the country.

Second, Putin has restored Russian control over Crimea, an act that was popular with most Crimean residents and most Russians as well. The takeover entailed some short-term costs (including some rather mild economic sanctions), but it also solidified Russian control over its naval base in Sevastopol and will allow Russia to claim oil and gas reserves in the Black Sea that may be worth trillions of dollars. The United States and Europe can try to block development of these reserves by tightening sanctions even more, but they are more likely to let sanctions ease off once the situation in Ukraine cools. And if Russia eventually decides to start exploiting these areas, is the United States going to send the 6th Fleet to stop it?

Third, Putin has reminded Ukraine's leaders that he has many ways to make their lives difficult. No matter what their own inclinations may be, it is therefore in their interest to maintain at least a cordial relationship with Moscow. And Ukraine's new president, Petro Poroshenko, got the message. As he told Lally Weymouth of the Washington Post before his election, "Without a direct dialogue with Russia, it will be impossible to create security." Since taking office, he has made it clear that he wants to expand Ukraine's economic ties to Europe -- something crucial to any hope of reforming its troubled economy -- but he also intends to improve relations with Russia as well.

Fourth, Friedman's tale of a "revived" NATO is wishful thinking at best and pure fiction at worst. The alliance did deploy a few warplanes to the east to reassure its Baltic members, and Obama offered the usual verbal affirmations and pledged $1 billion in miscellaneous defense measures during his visit to Poland this week. But the Poles seem less than reassured and continue to demand more U.S. protection; what they seem to want is a big NATO military base on their territory. The crisis also reminded observers that NATO expansion was never based on serious calculations of interest and capability: The United States and its allies simply assumed the Article 5 pledge to defend NATO's new members would never have to be honored. I don't think Russia has the slightest intention of expanding anywhere else, but doubts about the wisdom of NATO's earlier expansion have never been greater.

Friedman also says Europeans are now debating increased defense spending, as if these discussions were going to make Putin lose a lot of sleep. In fact, NATO's European members have talked about doing enhanced defense capabilities for years, but the level of actual spending has steadily declined.

Finally, Friedman seems to think Russia signed its new 30-year, $400 billion gas deal with China out of a sense of desperation and that the deal is a losing proposition. Hardly: The price China reportedly agreed to pay is slightly less than what Russia charges its European customers, but it is more than double the price that customers in the Commonwealth of Independent States cough up, and it will still earn Gazprom a tidy profit. More importantly, the deal strengthens Sino-Russian economic relations and diversifies Gazprom's customer base, which will allow it to push for harder bargains elsewhere. Western sanctions may have made Putin somewhat more willing to cut a deal, but it is still a net win for him.

To sum up: Putin's maneuverings look like a failure only if you believe his goal was to dismember Ukraine completely or re-create the old Soviet Union. By contrast, if you think his primary objective was to keep Ukraine from joining a U.S.-led "sphere of influence" in Europe, then his handling of the crisis looks adroit, ruthless, and successful.

In short, Putin's tacit acceptance of the recent Ukrainian election and his other moves to de-escalate the crisis aren't an example of his backing down in the face of coordinated Western pressure. Instead, he is lowering the temperature because he got the most important things he wanted and just about everything he could reasonably expect. Putin didn't "blink"; he just knew when to pocket his gains and cash in.


Comment: As the information war continues it's becoming more and more obvious to those with two firing neurons just how divorced from reality these policy pushers are. Wishful thinking is their greatest weakness, and it's more apparent than ever that the downfall of the United States is its own doing.
www.foreignpolicy.com... 4/no_bluff_putin_russia_ukraine_obama_tom_friedman

originally posted by: letscit
a reply to: dragonridr

Bottom line Putin has destroyed the Russian economy over his idea of an eastern Europe coalition. Hes pushed the remaining countries running to NATO destroyed his trade with Europe. If this was planned by NATO like Russia claims they obviously got Russia to fall for it hook line and sinker.

Even US corporations are fleeing the dollar Titanic

The U.S. dollar is being increasingly dropped as the currency for settling international trade. But perhaps the latest trend provides the most startling evidence yet that the dollar is doomed as the world reserve currency.

The Financial Times reported today that U.S. corporations are using the Chinese renminbi to buy imports over three times more than they had the previous year:
China's renminbi is rapidly displacing the US dollar as a trading currency not only in Asia and Europe but now also in the US home market.

The value of renminbi payments between the US and the rest of the world rose by 327 per cent in April this year from the same month a year ago (see chart) as more US corporations switched to using the Chinese currency to pay for imports from China, according to data from SWIFT, the international currency settlement firm.

First, US importers can slash the cost of imports from China by agreeing to trade in renminbi rather than US dollars, Lodge said. Second, a recent surge in the popularity of a host of renminbi-denominated financial market instruments are making it easier for US corporates both to hedge currency risk and to earn an investment return from the renminbi they hold.

U.S. corporations are just following the global trend where the largest economies in the world are jumping from the dollar Titanic. Last April, the world's 12th-ranked economy, Australia, joined a growing list of nations that have agreed to bypass the dollar in bilateral trade with China. China, ranked 2nd behind the U.S., also has similar agreements with Japan (3rd), Brazil (6th), India (9th), and Russia (10th).

Further, the BRICS nations appear ready to shake up the 'world order' with the deployment of their own development bank as reported today by Al Jazeera:
After more than six decades of dictating development policy in much of the emerging world, the Western-led International Monetary Fund and World Bank may soon have some competition.

The BRICS nations - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - are reportedly close to finalizing their long-awaited development bank and currency reserve, each valued at $100 billion, in what has been billed as a historic challenge by the world's emerging economies to a global financial architecture that has been dominated by the U.S. and Western Europe since its post - World War II inception.
The IMF and World Bank also appear to be pushing for a global economic "reset". "We need to push the reset button. The world is still much too much caught in a crisis-management mode," said Klaus Schwab founder of the World Economic Forum earlier this year.

A sentiment echoed by IMF head Christine Lagarde during the same event:

It's only been on year since China formally called for a new global currency citing similar concerns, as reported by the Associated Press:
China is calling for a global currency to replace the dominant dollar, showing a growing assertiveness on revamping the world economy ahead of next week's London summit on the financial crisis.

The surprise proposal by Beijing's central bank governor reflects unease about its vast holdings of U.S. government bonds and adds to Chinese pressure to overhaul a global financial system dominated by the dollar and Western governments. Both the United States and the European Union brushed off the idea.

The world economic crisis shows the "inherent vulnerabilities and systemic risks in the existing international monetary system," Gov. Zhou Xiaochuan
Additionally, in the midst of this global currency shakeup former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker has hinted at a new Bretton Woods to prevent "destructive financial crisis."

Volcker said in his Bretton Woods speech this past May:
Was the exorbitant privilege of the dollar as a reserve currency also a dangerous temptation to procrastinate - an impediment to timely policy adjustments, risking eventual breakdown?....

A new Bretton Woods conference? We are long ways from that. But surely events have raised, whether we want to admit it or not, some fundamental questions that have been ignored for decades.
Maybe the reset is happening right in front of us. If U.S. companies choose to abandon dollars for imports, the dollar is in very big trouble, and China may get their wish of a new global currency after all - the renminbi.


the problem I have with all this is, I am just an ordinary-hard working American citizen with a family who cant make ends meet now. wtf is to happen in a couple of years. time for me to definitely flee the population areas.

www.activistpost.com... for-chinese.html

Your source doesnt understand economics very well. China uses there currency for US transactions often the transactions will be exchanged into dollars by the bank they use. However the US bank also does conversions if they transfer without conversion to dollars. All this means is Chinese banks are getting lazy because usually a bank will ship dollars into whatever the local currency is but it doesnt matter which bank does conversions. Before you play in the banking industry it might pay for you to see how it works. Also my other favorite Russian treat is Petro dollars not realizing it has nothing to do with US currency its a simple way for countries to compare there oil prices doesnt mean US dollars are used for the transactions.

People often do not understand international banking and just flat out get things wrong more often than not. Heres a good general rule if a country uses US dollars in a transaction the only way the US can make money is if the transaction is through a US bank. Someone using US dollars to pay for something between two countries there is no way for the US to make money.

a reply to: letscit

This article is hilarious is the writer totally out of touch? NATO will expand thanks to Putin there is a line of new applicants. Did you know oddly even Columbia is now asking to join NATO. And of course now Ukraine has changed there mind and now Georgia is moving forward with their submission. Finland who originally rejected NATO is now joining.Estonia has decided to attempt to join.Than lets not forget Kosovo,moldova,Serbia,ireland Austria,Sweden,and lets not forget Mexico thats started working on its peace plan. Than theres finland whos discussing it thanks to putin. Putin did more to expand NATO than any single person on the planet. See whan a country starts showing a major disregard for a country's sovereignty like Russia did countries get nervous and start trying to find allies.

originally posted by: letscit
Who's winning the battle for Ukraine? Despite continued signs of trouble in Ukraine's eastern provinces, some pretty prominent people have recently offered a decidedly upbeat interpretation of events there. The first was U.S. President Barack Obama, who, during his commencement speech at West Point last week, cited the Western response to the crisis as a telling example of successful multilateral diplomacy. In his words, "the mobilization of world opinion and international institutions served as a counterweight to Russian propaganda, Russian troops on the borders, and armed militias." It's not over, he warned, but this effort "has given a chance for the Ukrainian people to choose their future."

A second optimistic appraisal came from New York Times columnist Tom Friedman, who announced on May 27 that Vladimir Putin had "blinked" and proclaimed that the Russian leader "got pretty much everything wrong." According to Friedman, "Putin's seizure of Crimea has weakened the Russian economy, led to China getting a bargain gas deal, revived NATO, spurred Europe to start ending its addiction to Russian gas and begun a debate across Europe about increasing defense spending." His close-to-gleeful summary: "the country Putin threatens most today is Russia."

There's a grain of truth in these optimistic assessments, in the sense that Russia has paid a price for its recent actions. And Obama and Friedman are correct to remind us that Russia is not the looming geopolitical threat that some hawks tried to conjure up when it seized Crimea. But what both Obama and Friedman miss is the real -- and completely normal --motivation behind Putin's behavior. It ain't rocket science: Putin was willing to pay a substantial price because Russia's vital interests were at stake. On balance, I'll bet Putin still sees this matter as a net win.

Just consider what Putin has achieved in the past few months.

First, he has put the idea of a further NATO expansion on the back burner for a long time, and maybe forever. Russia has opposed NATO's march eastward ever since it began in the mid-1990s, but Russia was not in a position to do much about it. The brief 2008 war between Russia and Georgia was Putin's first attempt to draw a red line, and that minor skirmish dampened enthusiasm for expansion considerably. This time around, Putin made it abundantly clear that any future attempt to bring Ukraine into NATO or even into EU membership will be met with firm Russian opposition and will probably lead to dismemberment of the country.

Second, Putin has restored Russian control over Crimea, an act that was popular with most Crimean residents and most Russians as well. The takeover entailed some short-term costs (including some rather mild economic sanctions), but it also solidified Russian control over its naval base in Sevastopol and will allow Russia to claim oil and gas reserves in the Black Sea that may be worth trillions of dollars. The United States and Europe can try to block development of these reserves by tightening sanctions even more, but they are more likely to let sanctions ease off once the situation in Ukraine cools. And if Russia eventually decides to start exploiting these areas, is the United States going to send the 6th Fleet to stop it?

Third, Putin has reminded Ukraine's leaders that he has many ways to make their lives difficult. No matter what their own inclinations may be, it is therefore in their interest to maintain at least a cordial relationship with Moscow. And Ukraine's new president, Petro Poroshenko, got the message. As he told Lally Weymouth of the Washington Post before his election, "Without a direct dialogue with Russia, it will be impossible to create security." Since taking office, he has made it clear that he wants to expand Ukraine's economic ties to Europe -- something crucial to any hope of reforming its troubled economy -- but he also intends to improve relations with Russia as well.

Fourth, Friedman's tale of a "revived" NATO is wishful thinking at best and pure fiction at worst. The alliance did deploy a few warplanes to the east to reassure its Baltic members, and Obama offered the usual verbal affirmations and pledged $1 billion in miscellaneous defense measures during his visit to Poland this week. But the Poles seem less than reassured and continue to demand more U.S. protection; what they seem to want is a big NATO military base on their territory. The crisis also reminded observers that NATO expansion was never based on serious calculations of interest and capability: The United States and its allies simply assumed the Article 5 pledge to defend NATO's new members would never have to be honored. I don't think Russia has the slightest intention of expanding anywhere else, but doubts about the wisdom of NATO's earlier expansion have never been greater.

Friedman also says Europeans are now debating increased defense spending, as if these discussions were going to make Putin lose a lot of sleep. In fact, NATO's European members have talked about doing enhanced defense capabilities for years, but the level of actual spending has steadily declined.

Finally, Friedman seems to think Russia signed its new 30-year, $400 billion gas deal with China out of a sense of desperation and that the deal is a losing proposition. Hardly: The price China reportedly agreed to pay is slightly less than what Russia charges its European customers, but it is more than double the price that customers in the Commonwealth of Independent States cough up, and it will still earn Gazprom a tidy profit. More importantly, the deal strengthens Sino-Russian economic relations and diversifies Gazprom's customer base, which will allow it to push for harder bargains elsewhere. Western sanctions may have made Putin somewhat more willing to cut a deal, but it is still a net win for him.

To sum up: Putin's maneuverings look like a failure only if you believe his goal was to dismember Ukraine completely or re-create the old Soviet Union. By contrast, if you think his primary objective was to keep Ukraine from joining a U.S.-led "sphere of influence" in Europe, then his handling of the crisis looks adroit, ruthless, and successful.

In short, Putin's tacit acceptance of the recent Ukrainian election and his other moves to de-escalate the crisis aren't an example of his backing down in the face of coordinated Western pressure. Instead, he is lowering the temperature because he got the most important things he wanted and just about everything he could reasonably expect. Putin didn't "blink"; he just knew when to pocket his gains and cash in.
[/url]

Novorossiya is a reality, another country in a making. What we are witnessing now is 'negotiation' about the borders with leftover of Ukraine and possibility of some other regions to join. Shame that Kiev Junta decided to shell those cities and towns and let people suffer as a revenge but I hope they will be brought to justice for their crimes.

Russia has lots of fertile land and countries like China and India can use lots of food and agricultural items.

This alone offers immense potential for Russia to become the bread basket of EurAsia region.

Many similar industries can be cultivated to cater to the growth of the BRICS economies.

That would be a nice diversification from energy exports to Europe and resulting economic pressures.

originally posted by: victor7
Russia has lots of fertile land and countries like China and India can use lots of food and agricultural items.

This alone offers immense potential for Russia to become the bread basket of EurAsia region.

Many similar industries can be cultivated to cater to the growth of the BRICS economies.

That would be a nice diversification from energy exports to Europe and resulting economic pressures.

Oh im sure if Russia wants to sell land China will buy it. See Chinas goal is to buy land rights for agriculture they dont want to buy food they want to produce it. Remember for the most part Chinas and Russias goals are incompatible.In a decade Russia will be so dependent on China just ask Vietnam how that went.

interesting to say at least

a reply to: cosmonova

First of all that is not William Hague's actual twitter profile, his is @WilliamJHague, and second the footage allegedly showing white phosphorus use in E Ukraine was filmed in Irak...

Russia’s parliamentary speaker, Sergei Naryshkin has asserted that it was Ukraine that annexed the Crimea, not Russia. Naryshkin’s statement is astoundingly inaccurate, but any amusement at a politician’s foray into history would be misplaced. Moscow, one senses, has understood that there’s no getting away from the word ‘annexation’ and is trying to hijack it.

The government-linked press agency RIA Novosti simply reports Naryshkin’s words, before providing a seriously distorted account of recent events.

According to the report, Naryshkin “blamed Ukraine for annexing the Crimea in 1991.

“Back in January 1991 there was a referendum in the Crimean oblast which disputed the Crimea’s transfer to Ukraine. 93% voted for this with an 81% turnout. It was effectively then, 23 years ago, that the annexation of the Crimea was carried out. It was admittedly peaceful, but it was really an annexation”, Naryshkin said, speaking in the State Duma on Wednesday. He noted that this was, unfortunately, made possible in part by the irresponsibility of a number of Russian politicians”.

In Soviet times that last sentence would have made many politicians tremble, probably with cause. Those days may have gone, but you are unlikely to find Naryshkin’s words criticized in the mainstream media.

The referendum he refers to was over whether the autonomous republic status removed in 1945 (before the Crimea formally became part of the Ukrainian SSR in 1954) should be reinstated. There was overwhelming support for the Crimea becoming an autonomous republic within the Soviet Union. Ukrainian scholar Natalya Belitser writes that “after much heated debates and, perhaps, keeping in mind the possible bloody and violent consequences of rejecting demands similar to those made in other parts of the ailing Soviet Union, on 12 February 1991, the Ukrainian Supreme Soviet adopted a law providing autonomous status for Crimea within the borders of Ukraine.”

khpg.org...

originally posted by: Dutzy
a reply to: cosmonova

First of all that is not William Hague's actual twitter profile, his is @WilliamJHague, and second the footage allegedly showing white phosphorus use in E Ukraine was filmed in Irak...

go to the previous page there is a video from Slavyansk

or here

www.youtube.com...