By: Ian_Brockwell

Following a three-day visit to former Soviet States Azerbaijan, Georgia and Ukraine, Dick Cheney continued his thinly disguised threats against Russia and sought backing for stronger action against a country that was forced to defend its citizens recently, following an attack by US ally Georgia.

The gall of this man and other members of the Bush administration seem to have no limits. Is it really possible that anyone can take his remarks seriously when he accuses Russia of "bullying others"? Are we supposed to believe that the illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq are nothing more than a friendly helping hand? Is the pressure and sanctions being applied to Iran not "bullying"? And what about the recent trips into Pakistan´s sovereign territory to kill some more civilians, what are we supposed to call that?

Most of the comments that Cheney made at a global security conference in Cernobbio, Italy, seemed to be describing the Bush administrations crimes, not Russia´s. Is he getting a little confused over which country is doing what?

Cheney spoke of the risks of confrontation with NATO, but failed to mention that one of the United States most sophisticated warships, the USS Mount Whitney, has arrived at the port of Poti in Georgia, supposedly bringing "humanitarian aid", and at the same time effectively giving the "finger" to the Russian warship also in that area. If that is not "confrontation" what is?

Why is the US using warships to deliver "aid"? The USS Mount Whitney is not designed for this task and surely it would be less confrontational if they used non-military ships for this purpose. Could it be that the US are bringing more than food and a few tents to Georgia and using Navy ships to conceal this?

Another reason could be to place additional warships in the area for a forthcoming attack on Iran, and the Georgia conflict was a good excuse to do that. It is still very likely that the US and Israel may use Georgia in the attack on Iran, hence the urgency to restore conditions and weapons. Sadly, it is the Georgian people (and their country) that will pay the price for taking part in this lunacy, when Iran retaliate. It will be interesting to see if Saakashvili finds the courage to leave his country this time, just before all of this happens.

Whilst Russia is most certainly on the Neo-Cons list of countries to "acquire", Iran is first in line. Although Iran are not developing a nuclear weapon (US intelligence have confirmed this), why shouldn´t they? If it is OK for Israel to have around 200 nuclear weapons, why shouldn´t other countries in that area have a few for defensive purposes? Why does Israel think it has some special right to exist on this planet and have a superior military force, while others can not?

Let´s be honest about the situation, Israel has not shown that it can be trusted to have such devastating weapons, and some have actually talked about using them (on Iran). Iran is not involved in constant wars with its neighbors and at the moment seems to be a far more reliable candidate to hold such weapons (although it would be much better if no one had them at all).

The recent actions by the Bush administration (and Cheney) appear to give the impression that a clock is "ticking" somewhere, but what can possibly be motivating them into creating a world war that will kill everyone on the planet? Do they feel it is their duty to bring about the biblical "end of times"?

The Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev, has said that Russia is a nation "to be reckoned with" and you can read that as a very simple message meaning Russia will not accept US dominance (or foolish threats from Europe). If Russia is attacked, she will respond. And I´m afraid that means "Game Over" for everyone.

Maybe now is a good time (for those who believe in God) to hope that the biblical prophecies made at the "end of times" is correct. It looks as if we may get a chance to find out very soon.

By Ian Brockwell
http://www.Profindsearch.com

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

US to establish naval base in Georgia

The US is negotiating with Georgia and Turkey to establish a naval base at one of the two key Georgian ports of Batumi or Poti, reports say.

Turkey, in an attempt to avoid political tension with Russia, has not officially revealed its position regarding the plan, said Gruzya Online, a Russian-language internet site.

Russia had previously announced its intention to station its own special forces at the Georgian ports.

One of the responsibilities of US Special Forces in the region is to ensure the security of an oil pipeline passing through Georgia.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=68735&sectionid=351020606

Die Krise in Georgien beherrscht gegenwärtig weltweit die Schlagzeilen und stellt die deutsch-russischen Beziehungen auf eine harte Probe. Europa und die Nato sind gespalten in der Ansicht, wie man mit dem russischen Bären umzugehen hat. Dr. Ernst-Jörg von Studnitz ist Botschafter a.D., Vorsitzender des Deutsch-Russischen Forums und gilt als Kenner der russischen Mentalität. Von 1995 bis Juni 2002 war er Botschafter in Moskau. Im Gespräch mit einem Reporter von JungeMedien Hamburg stellte er sich kritischen Fragen zur neuen Russland-Krise.
[audio http://behind-media.de/Artikelbilder/von_studnitz/Interview_vonstudnitz04092008.mp3]Im Gespräch mit Dr. Ernst-Jörg von Studnitz
Interview: JMH-Reporter Schulz
Länge ca. 15 Minuten

Russland Im Kreuzfeuer: Angriffe auf die Pressefreiheit, Verstaatlichung von Unternehmen, Liquidierungen von unliebsamen Personen, Polonium-Affäre, Energiepolitik als Machtpolitik, der Abgang von Altkanzler Gerhard Schröder, Raketenschild in Polen und die Georgien-Krise. Die neusten Spannungen mit Russland folgen einer ganzen Kette von Ereignissen, die nicht isoliert betrachtet werden können, wenn man die neue Russland-Krise verstehen will.

Europa braucht keinen neuen Krieg
Unabhängig davon, wer in Südossetien zuerst geschossen hat. Die Welt kann weder einen neuen Kalten Krieg, noch einen neuen Weltkrieg gebrauchen. Zwar ist allseits bekannt, dass die Russen keine Samariter sind, aber die Aussagen des georgischen Präsidenten Saakaschwili zum Vorgang der Georgien-Krise werden in einem Spiegel-Online-Artikel vom 30.08.2008 ernsthaft in Frage gestellt. Kritisch beleuchtet wird vom Spiegel in einem Artikel vom 13.08.2008 auch die Rolle der Amerikaner in der Georgien-Affäre.

Russland ist ein wichtiger Partner für Europa, doch das gegenseitige Misstrauen hat in jüngster Zeit wieder neue Nahrung bekommen. Der russische Bär ist aus dem Winterschlaf erwacht und hat zu neuer Stärke gefunden. Spätestens seit der Zerschlagung der russischen Erdölkonzerne unter der Ära Wladimir Putin und der zwangsweisen Verstaatlichung dieser, ergießt sich über Russland ein neuer Geldregen.

Die neue Stärke des russischen Bären
500 Milliarden liegen auf der hohen Kante. In den Jahren 2005/2006 wurde bekannt, dass Russland seine Schulden beim Pariser Klub in Höhe von über 40 Milliarden US-Dollar auf einen Schlag zurückzahlen kann. Größter Gläubiger Russlands ist Deutschland, dem rund die Hälfte der Milliarden zustehen. Die Vanity Fair kürte Putin in einem Ranking jüngst zum "einflussreichsten Menschen der Welt", besonders im Hinblick auf die riesigen Energieressourcen, über die Russland verfügt.

Der Faktor Russland wird in der Geopolitik der neuen Weltordnung eine zunehmend große Rolle spielen. Auf die Frage, auf welchem Kurs er das heutige Russland sieht, antwortet Dr. Ernst-Jörg von Studnitz im Interview: "Der gegenwärtige Kurs von Russland ist ein solcher, Russland wieder groß und stark in der Welt dastehen zu lassen. Und auf diesem Wege sind sie natürlich schon erheblich weit vorangekommen."

(jmh)
Verwandte Themen

Dr. Ernst-Jörg von Studnitz im Interview zur Gewalt gegen russische Demonstranten (Deutschlandfunk) »

Dr. Ernst-Jörg von Studnitz im Interview zur Georgien-Krise (Deutschlandfunk) »

Internetseite des Deutsch-Russischen Forum e.V. »

Internetseite des Petersburger Dialog e.V. »

"Vorsicht vor diesem Jäger" Eine Analyse russischer Großmachtpolitik (welt.de) »

Vollständiges Putin-Interview (ungekürzt) - Thomas Roth im Gespräch mit Wladimir Putin:

[googlevideo=http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=5369140532414613853]

Poles first in Euro dance contest

The Poles beat 13 other couples to win the Eurovision title

Poland claimed first place in the Eurovision Dance Contest, which was held in Scotland on Saturday.

Actor Marcin Mroczek and dancer Edyta Herbus won the votes of watchers throughout the continent with a routine set to Michael Jackson's music.

Russia finished second and Ukraine were third, while hosts UK finished ninth out of 14 competitors.

A television audience of millions watched the 135 minute program, which came from Glasgow's SECC.

Graham Norton and Claudia Winkleman hosted the show, which featured 14 couples from Austria, Azerbaijan, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Sweden, Ukraine and the United Kingdom.

Each couple - one celebrity and one professional dancer - performed a freestyle dance with a national flavor which could have elements of Latin and Ballroom.

The show was fronted by Graham Norton and Claudia Winkleman

A panel of expert judges as well as the TV audience voting from home then decided on the winner.

The UK was represented by Vincent Simone and Eastenders actress Louisa Lytton.

It is the second time the contest has been run. Finland won last year's vote.

"With this competition, we created a fantastic new Eurovision tradition, which we are confident will last for many years to come," said Bjorn Erichsen, Director of Eurovision TV.

The truth of the matter is that Russia is our enemy.

The 'Real' Russia (as opposed to Russia's often ridiculous self portrayals) is that of a nation of thieves, plunderers and murders. I state this without any exaggeration.

In my opinion, 'The' most accurate and informative source of information available can only be found at

''La RUSSOPHOBE"

I strongly recommend La Russophobe to ALL who seek the truth!

Mykolas

As you may have heard, the EU declined to include the "European perspective" phrase in an agreement that the Brussels is scheduled to sign with Kyiv at the EU-Ukraine summit in Evian, France on September 9th.  Instead, the EU will acknowledge: "the European aspirations of Ukraine" and will leave "open the way for further progressive developments in EU-Ukraine relations."  The difference is one of depth and level of commitment.

The latter phrases allow the EU to remain, at least nominally, engaged with Ukraine, but unambiguously refuting any idea of a prospective membership in the European Union.  The former phrase (i.e. European perspective) would identify Ukraine's EU aspirations as something more than a hypothetical idea.

What's your point?

To myself, I thought that this is not surprising.  With the EU still digesting the 2004 and 2007 enlargement waves, experiencing the Romania-Bulgaria fatigue syndrome, and dealing with an internal problem caused by Ireland's vote against the Lisbon constitution treaty, any talk of further enlargement perspective for other states, especially those like Ukraine with 46 million citizens or Turkey with 70 million, must be nauseating.  Although, smaller states, like Serbia with a population of 7 million, have a more realistic perspective as we have recently learned from Mr. Barroso; Julien Frisch disagrees.

But I guess I was wrong.  It's not because of the above.  It's actually something entirely not related to the EU.

The reason that the EU decided against recognizing the "European perspective"of Ukraine is, because of the recent break-up of that country's ruling coalition, according to an EU diplomat (Ukr. via Neeka's Backlog) on the inside of the EU-Ukraine negotiations.

It's really that simple.  You see the Ukrainians - some would argue because of their political culture - undid their own chances at a closer relationship with the EU.  Here is what the diplomat said (rough translation; original in Ukrainian here):

The shortsightedness of your politicians is surprising. Up until as late as Wednesday, Ukraine's prospects were quite good to have included in the political section of the Association Agreement such statements as: "on the basis of shared values and Ukraine's European choice" and "will be open." However, now they are scratched off.

I agree that politicians are shortsighted.  Being rational actors, there are large incentives to maximize their self-interest in the short-term than over a long run.  Thus, that's not much of a criticism to say that "your politicians" are shortsighted.  Are the EU politicians well known for their long-term thinking?

Furthermore it is puzzling why the withdrawal of one section from the ruling coalition, and the consequent potential for a pre-term election is NOT an example of shared values between the EU and Ukraine.  As a democracy with competitive, free and fair elections, Ukraine is attempting to find an institutional solution that will accommodate all of its political actors.

It is a democratic process through which every democratic state must pass through if it is to move beyond the adjective - "transitional."  Well consolidated democracies, such as Canada and Japan are currently going through the same coalition formation/pre-term election process, and Belgium in the past year took 196 days to form a coalition, which almost beat their 1977 record of 208 days.

Thus, it would seem that what Ukraine is going through right now SHARES quite a bit with the European values.  It is unfortunate that some in the EU instead of owning up to their true reasons (i.e. fatigue enlargement and internal constitutional crisis) prefer to shift the blame on the other party in the negotiations.

May I suggest to the reader a small book by one Harry G Frankfurt titled - On Bullshit?

• Image credit:  User:Serhiy on Wikimedia Commons; license:  GNU Free Documentation License.

As my regular readers will observe I am not only taking a Russia-friendly approach on my blogs but I am posting articles which are actively calling for the European Union to build and strengthen a rapport with the Russian Federation as a friend and partner of the EU.

Ex-chancellor Gerhardt Schroeder is right to see Russia's destiny to be with the European Union. Moreover, I would like to see the Russian Federation join the EU but recognise that to be a pipe-dream, at least for now. Firstly, the EU would feel threatened by the prospect of its huge neighbour swamping the rest and secondly, the US would never allow such a threat to its global, imperial pretensions to materialise.

The present danger that we face in Europe is not from Russia but from the continued trouble-making instigated by self-serving neocons ensconced in the White House and their errand-boys in Downing Street and the east European EU. These fifth-columnists are on the payroll of US imperialism and have no wish to see a united Europe developing a foreign policy independently of the US. They would rather that the EU take on a 'Euro-Atlantic' role together with Washington's cat's paw, NATO, under US global military-economic hegemony.

Any sane person would see that such an arrangement, the present status quo, not only results in the destabilising of European security --as we have seen recently result in the Caucasus-- but that it puts Europe under the constant threat of regional war exacerbated and provoked by US interference. Saakashvili is not the only madman to have wheedled his way into power in eastern Europe. There are other narrow-minded fanatics and opportunists, for example in Poland, the Czech Republic and the Ukraine, who would be more than willing to do the bidding of neocon bosses in the USA to bring destruction upon the heads of Europeans.

Some of us remember how the US planned its nuclear strategy in the 'eighties to include a European Theatre of War, meaning a 'limited' nuclear exchange with the old Soviet Union to include Europe and not the north American continent. That threat led to the growth of a huge Peace Movement in Europe and an equal loss of US popularity. It is ironic that the US appears to be free now to develop its First Strike nuclear doctrine of 'Compellance' with the installation of the ABM missile shield (more of that anon) with no such resistance from Europeans.

The ABM shield is certainly not popular either amongst the people of Poland or the Czech Republic where public opinion is simply being ignored by opportunist, pro-US governments. While crowing about the need for representative democracy amongst others, the Atlanticists' own record in that concern is, to say the least, deplorable. While ruthless imperialism by war criminals is ok for the Good Guys of the West where Might is Right the slightest sign of the East's approaching western atrocities is noisily denounced. It's all rather yawningly tiresome.

At least one Russian strategist is warning us that the conflict in the Caucasus is by no means over and that the mischief-makers in Washington DC will now be looking to cause a bigger crisis in the Ukraine which could lead to civil war and a confrontation between Russia and the West. As well as that, the ongoing threat of a surprise attack by the US proxy, Israel, with or without support from the US military during the time prior to the November presidential election, puts us all on a Red Alert.

The need for a collective, friendly European initiative towards Russia is now needed urgently. As France's Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner, is reported to have said the other day in respect of our need to build a common alliance with Russia:

"We have to be together. The US have their own views, but we are living close to Russia. We need to develop our own policy, a neighbouring policy. We have to talk about our views of being close to Russia, a great country, a partner."

Kouchner, of course, is absolutely right. It's not surrender-monkey talk but that of the pragmatic, classic diplomacy for which while France is traditionally famed is anathema to the fanatics who still rule the dual-party, opposame dictatorship in the USA. Kouchner, all credit to him, speaks as a European, unlike the traitorous Brown and Miliband who will happily sell out the interests of their own people in order to ensure a continued political sodomy by their American minders.

It's time to cut the crap and deal with matters of survival. The hour is already very, very late. Homegrown Europhobes who continue to bleat about a 'fascist EU state' are their and our worst enemy. For all their talk about a loss of 'sovereign' powers the reality is that they would rather Britain forsake its European partners to continue as a vassal state of Washington DC, serving the warmongering interests of the notorious Anglo-American fraternities responsible for the deaths of 70 million Europeans in two world wars.

So which is it to be, fellow Britons? Will you, as Europeans, choose a common destiny where Europe and Russia coexist together in peace or are you prepared, through inaction, to allow your quisling leaders continue with a diabolical 'special relationship' which has caused so much bloodshed and misery on this war-torn Planet? The time to decide has come and the time for dithering is ended.

Which is it to be?

Rory Winter, New Civilization

Russia’s recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent nations may signal the demise of Georgia. It also raises serious questions about future relations with Ukraine.

That threat cannot be dismissed as fanciful or far­fetched as in the past. Russia’s foreign policy in what it calls its “near abroad” has changed dramatically in the past month. Borders are no longer sacrosanct, and Russia has not hesitated to use its monopoly of gas supplies to Ukraine as a political weapon in the past. Ukraine is not blind to the new situation, but it is, in many respects, unprepared for the different forms of potential conflict.

The critical area is Crimea and, in particular, the port of Sevastopol. When Ukrainian president Viktor Yushchenko refused to extend the lease on the port to the Russian Black Sea fleet beyond 2017, he ignited a new conflict with the northern neighbor. Yushchenko has also demanded that the annual rent Russia pays for its two bases, $98 million, be increased significantly.

Last month in Sevastopol, there was a substantial protest of ethnic Russian members of the Russian Bloc, the most powerful political party on the peninsula. Led by Vladimir Tyunin, they were demanding that Crimea become part of the Russian Federation.

That demand is hardly new. In the early 1990s, former Crimean president Yuri Meshkov ignited a similar movement and promised a referendum on the issue. The Ukrainian government acted firmly to quell the separatists and abolished the post of Crimean president.

Rumors abound that Russia is issuing passports to the majority group of ethnic Russians, just as it did to South Ossetians and Abkhazians in Georgia. Prominent Russian statespersons, including Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov, frequently visit Sevastopol and demand that it be returned to Russia.

Added to the mix are the Crimean Tatars, deported by Josef Stalin in 1944-­45, but permitted to return under Gorbachev and now comprising about one­sixth of the population. The relationship between the Tatars and the government in Kyiv is amicable, but relations with Russians who own most of the former Tatar lands and property are volatile.

In 2004, when the Orange Revolution took place, eventually bringing Yushchenko into office, two regions of Ukraine – Donetsk and Luhansk – threatened to leave Ukraine with support from Russia. The two regions, centers of the coal, steel and chemicals industries, provided overwhelming support to the candidacy of former prime minister Viktor Yanukovych. They have large populations of ethnic Russians comprising majorities in the major cities.

Since the population as a whole is Russian speaking, there is no ethnic tension. But the Regions Party, which dominates eastern Ukraine, has a radically different perception of the country than the Orange parties currently in office. It is backed by Ukraine’s richest and most powerful oligarch, Rinat Akhmetov, and supports warm relations with Russia and close ties with the European Union, while strongly opposing Ukraine’s request to join NATO and Yushchenko’s support for Georgia.

After Russia’s brutal defeat of Georgian forces, both Yushchenko and Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko visited the Donbas (to Donetsk and Luhansk respectively). They were not co­ordinated visits, but the timing seemed notable. Both leaders wished to ensure that they have a voice in a formerly hostile voting area.

Today, the key issue is the territorial integrity of Ukraine. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev have indicated that they are prepared to revise formerly recognized borders. The Russian government is willing to support and sow disaffection in eastern Ukraine and Crimea, as well as in the Prydnistrova region of Moldova.

However, Ukraine tends to be its own worst enemy. Though its government has requested NATO membership, most residents oppose it. The Regions Party insists that no membership can take place without a referendum, the result of which hitherto has been a foregone conclusion.

Despite two recent elections, the Ukrainian parliament is so badly divided that it could not even pass the 2008 budget before the summer recess. Yushchenko has undermined every reform initiative of Tymoshenko. In turn, the ruling Orange coalition’s majority is down to two seats.

Perhaps most revealing of Ukraine’s predicament is the low standing in the polls of the president and his party. A poll conducted between Aug. 8 and 24 found that, had a parliamentary election been held at that time, 23.4 percent of respondents would have backed the Tymoshenko Bloc and 20.3 per cent the Regions Party. Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine and People’s Self­Defense Coalition and the Communists had 4.6 percent.

In terms of the popularity of the potential presidential candidates for the 2010 election, Tymoshenko leads with 24 per cent, followed by Yanukovych with 20. Yushchenko’s 7 percent makes him the least popular leader in Europe at a time when Ukraine’s economy is as strong as it has ever been.

Ukraine’s politicians need to focus on priorities. A coalition government to ensure internal unity seems to be a logical first step. Yushchenko cannot lead Ukraine without public support as the country enters its 18th and most critical year of independence.

Tomas Pojar, interviewed in the LA Times:

A new conflict can be created in Crimea . . . because of [Russia's] political and demographic and military presence. You have a lot of similarities to the situation in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, but it is not exactly the same. We should pay real attention to Ukraine, . . . supporting economic stability and, as far as we can do it, political stability.

US Navy flagship Mount Whitney docks at Georgian port where Russian troops are still stationed. Russia accuses US of supplying military aid. VP Dick Cheney committed to Georgia and Ukraine joining NATO.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4682003.ece

A US Navy flagship carrying humanitarian aid yesterday steamed into a Georgian port where Russian troops are still stationed, stoking tensions once again in the tinderbox Caucasus region.

A previous trip by US warships was cancelled at the last minute a week ago amid fears that an armed stand-off could intensify in the Black Sea port of Poti.

The arrival of the USS Mount Whitney, flagship of the 6th Fleet in the Mediterranean, came as Moscow accused Dick Cheney, the hawkish US Vice-President, of stoking tensions during a visit to Tbilisi this week. After meeting President Saakashvili, Mr Cheney vowed to bring Georgia into the Nato alliance. Russia sees such moves as Western encroachment on its traditional sphere of influence.

Russia’s leaders have accused previous US warships that docked at the port of Batumi, to the south, of delivering weapons to re-arm the smashed Georgian military — charges that Washington denied.

While Russia again questioned the deployment of what it described as “the number one ship of its type in the US Navy” in the Black Sea, it said that it planned no military action in response. The Russian Army has kept a small component of soldiers in Poti, where Georgian officials accuse them of looting port authority buildings.

“Naval ships of that class can hardly deliver a large amount of aid,” said Andrei Nesterenko, a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman. “Such ships have a hold for keeping provisions for the crew and items needed for sailing. How many tonnes of aid can a ship of that type deliver?”

He said that the presence of US warships could contravene international conventions governing shipping in the Black Sea, and in particular restrictions on the entry of naval ships from countries that do not share a Black Sea coastline. The small Russian garrison in Poti would pose no military threat to a vessel like the Mount Whitney, but the proximity of two hostile forces in such a fraught environment set the political temperature rising again in the Caucasus a month after Russia’s five-day war with Georgia.

Moscow, which followed up its crushing military defeat of Georgia by unilaterally recognising two of its breakaway provinces, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, was angry that Mr Cheney still insisted on Georgia’s entrance into the Atlantic alliance — something several key Nato members oppose. “The new promises to Tbilisi relating to the speedy membership of Nato strengthen the Saakashvili regime’s dangerous feeling of impunity and encourages its dangerous ambitions,” said Mr Nesterenko.

Visiting Kiev, the Ukrainian capital yesterday, Mr Cheney kept up his tough anti-Russian rhetoric when he urged Ukraine’s squabbling pro-Western leaders to unite in the face of threats to the country’s security. He met President Yushchenko and Yuliya Tymoshenko, the Prime Minister, and told them that Ukraine’s best hope was to be “united with other democracies”.

Mr Yushchenko has accused his former Orange Revolution ally of siding with Russia in the war with Georgia, an allegation she denies. The split led to the collapse of Ukraine’s coalition Government on Tuesday.

After endorsing Georgia’s application, Mr Cheney said that the US was also committed to Ukraine’s membership of Nato. Konstantin Kosachyov, head of the foreign affairs committee in Russia’s lower house, accused Mr Cheney of forging an “anti-Russian axis”.

Differing takes on what's been going on in Sevastopol. Russian Navy Blog has an account (translated from Russian) of street protests and harassment when the Coasties from the USCGS Dallas went ashore during their recent port visit. 

Meanwhile, the Kiev Post takes a look at the ethnic politics in the city, finds calm amongst the citizenry but lots of potential for discord. The article really highlights how dependent Sevastopol is, economically, on the presence of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. I can't help but think that that implies a lot of sympathy for the Russians even amongst local Ukrainian speakers.

Elsewhere in the Post, US-based analyst Roman Kupchinsky notes that the Ukrainians have a difficult balancing act to perform, both short- and long-term. He sees the Crimea as a potential flash point:

The prevalent speculation in Ukraine and in the West is that “liberating” the Crimean Peninsula’s Russian population will be the next pretext for Russia to expand its grip on the post Soviet space and gobble up Ukraine.

It is a scenario which needs to be carefully examined since it is feasible, but not probable, in the short run. 

He recommends not antagonizing the Russians as NATO support is by no means certain.

I wonder again, what genius thought it was a good idea for the Dallas and the Pathfinder to visit Sevastopol at this moment, and why.

RESPONDING to Yurii Ruban, former Deputy First Minister of Ukraine, in an article entitled, "Crisis in Kiev", that appeared on the website of the Guardian Newspaper, dated Friday 5^th September 2008.

Mr. Ruban writes:

... The outlook for Ukraine is stormy, but the country's not about to split apart. Instead, a complex political dance is unfolding

Writing in response (amended):

VIKTOR YUSHCHENKO, Ukraine's President, threatened to call a snap parliamentary election because the parliament is trying to cut-back his powers. But, this is probably connected to that fact that Mr. Yushchenko had earlier accused the prime minister, Yulia Tymoshenko, of "treason" for not criticising Russia's military attack on the tiny mountain enclave of South Ossetia, during the recent conflict between the warring sides. Russia has since, though, admitted the independence of Georgia after claims of "territorial integrity" were dropped.

The Ukraine is a difficult issue because more than half of its citizens see themselves as of Russian origination, the Ukraine simply being an extension of their homeland. Ukraine remains a political hot potatoe as Nato and the EU tempt Ukraine in joining their membership; such moves will test the patience of Russia to the full. Issues over Ukraine will likely anger the Kremlin much more than Georgia ever could.

... The president has been clear that he sees the Black Sea fleet's continued presence as an anachronism.

Anachronistic is certainly key language. I think this point is worth bearing out a little.

For example, is the build-up of NATO warships in the Black Sea a provocative action or a routine naval presence engaged in nothing out of the ordinary? If we examine more closely the military logistics it is easily determined that US and other NATO warships outnumber the Russian vessels but, according to the alliance's military headquarters at Mons (Belgium), the six ships are all involved in pre-planned training, to which the Russians themselves broke away from after Nicholas Sarkozy, the French EU President, called the emergency EU summit meeting last Monday which angered the Kremlin. The Russians were angered because the summit was called in addressing ‘what should be done with Russia after its military campaign in Georgia'.

The Russians have reacted in ways not probably fully envisaged. They dispatched one guided missile cruiser, the Moskva, and two missile boats to the port of Sukhumi because, put simply, the Western naval presence in the Black Sea appears threatening to Russia. In counter-balancing, yet further, Russia is said to be mounting three destroyers, two frigates, five corvettes and scores of missile boats at the Sevastopol naval base leased from Ukraine. Anachronistic?

UKRAINE's latest period of political turmoil comes at a crucial time for the country. Following the recent Georgia-Russia war, Ukraine's discernment and anxiety of insecurity couldn't be any higher: relations with Russia are fraught and there are added fears, too, that Ukraine's own "territorial integrity" might be called into question. Political uncertainty in Ukraine, though, will be more beneficial for Russia because it will make it extremely difficult for the US and its allies in supporting Ukraine's application to join NATO.

Economic conditions in Ukraine are deteriorating. Inflation remains exceedingly high at 26.9%, and it is very likely that gas imports will at least double from the start of 2009. If that was to happen, it would be equivalent to an eight-fold increase since 2005. Critically, this could cripple vast swathes of Ukrainian industry, as well as igniting additional inflationary pressures.

Investor sentiment within the Ukraine has worsened; fears are high that Russia might seek in stoking separatist sentiment in the Crimea. With inflation so high, and a widening current account deficit, Ukraine is very much on the verge of macroeconomic instability.

Ukraine requires a stable government. Without it, Ukraine seems certain to deteriorate even further`. There are controversial policy areas which the political parties need to find common ground over - such as issues over privatisation - because, failure to do so, could leave the country open in being taken over directly by Russia.

ONE of the ways out of the turmoil is for the coalition parties to simply regroup. Ukraine should remember that the creation of its government, since the Orange Revolution came about through the grouping together of the country's allies. Yes, there are differences but, in Ukraine's case, politicians must realise what could happen if the parties don't unite. The biggest obstacle, certainly, is trying to unify over Georgia which, legally will require tacit support from all sides.

Clearly, Ukraine must be of independent mind in determining exactly its future destiny. Policies do require support if Ukraine is to move away from its economic plight. The presidential administration cannot continue in repeatedly and systemically sabotaging government activities.

Another option is in calling for another early election. However, given the political and economic challenges facing Ukraine, the distraction of an election would possibly be the worst outcome. The sensitive state of relations with Russia, for instance, could exasperate yet further some of the deep divisions.

Whilst Russia's anger and unrest appears to be over Ukraine and Russia, the most important pressure actually comes from China. For many years China has joined Russia in defending the notion of "territorial integrity", saying that sovereign borders were inviolable. Now, though, it sees Moscow jettisoning this principle to both countries potential cost. Russias bitter and sour myopia may have gained it two tiny scraps of land but has lost its main ally, and perhaps, in the future, some of its own troubled provinces too.

It is worth remembering that Ukrainian politicians made clear to the British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, that they wanted "all the badges of friendship that were going". Ukraine also cautioned that they thought Russia was ready in picking a fight over the Crimea. But, is the US and the EU treading just too carefully with Russias unrest? It seems as if proportionate punishment is hard to deliver.

© Mark Dowe 2008: all rights protected

- Copyright is the currency by which information may be exchanged in certain instances. If you are unsure of your rights relating to digital communications you should seek independent legal advice.

Reference(s):

• Economist, "An Orange divorce"

• Guardian: Andrew Wilson, "Is Ukraine next?"

... The EU should be thinking about how it can extend a commitment to security, democracy and prosperity to neighbours

Considerations:

• Guardian: Britain urges EU to halt talks on Russia cooperation pact

• Observer (Sunday August 31, 2008) Gordon Brown: “This is how we will stand up to Russia's naked aggression”

… As European leaders meet, the Prime Minister says security is linked to the politics of energy

Remarks by Vice President Cheney and President Saakashvili of Georgia After Meeting in Tblisi

From the snake's mouth: How the US was, is and will be propping up Georgia

Army: soldier suicide rate may set record again - Most people don't understand what it's like in a highly dangerous combat environment where violence is the daily routine. Seeing other soldiers raping mothers and holding guns to the father's heads, shooting mothers in the head walking down the street, the child made an instant orphan, whole crowds mowed down by high-caliber weapons. And no one wanting to go to to get all that stopped. It is incredibly stressful, and you have to be on the inside to truly understand it and empathize with these guys. Sure, they signed up for it, but it is way more difficult to get out than in. Much like the Mob and CIA, both the same organization at the higher levels.

Pentagon to shift forces to Afghanistan - It's starting....

N Korea's Kim died in 2003; replaced by lookalike, says Japanese professor

U.S. appeals to Ukraine to unite with West

Moldovan splinter territory Transdniestria lifts moratorium on contacts with Moldova - At the czar's decree.

Transdniestria: Russia and Moldova's Secret Deal

Al Qaida warns of more Denmark attacks in new video

Gordon Brown asked by Former Home Secretary Charles Clarke to step down with honor

Obama secretly met with Fox News executives - Hillary Clinton still meets with Roger Ailes for hours each week. Big dinner, no one knows what's going on. This should be instant disqualification for the presidency in any nation daring to call itself free. A presidential candidate meeting with the media before an election? I can't believe this.

He has not provided specific information as to the identity of this American however my sources tell me that it could possibly belong  to a nine year old girl who is suspected of belonging  to the 'counter revolutionary' ''organization known as the 'Girl Scouts'. An obvious CIA operative who's work poses a very grave and serious threat to the Russian Empire and it's "HUMBLE' and "PEACE LOVING' citizens. Russia is considering a full scale invasion of the Baltic and Surrounding Slavic Nations to remove similar subversive organizations from within the boundaries of their coveted sphere of influence.

Additional sources tell me that a plastic bow and arrow were also found by his merry men. The rubber suction cup tip was removed and it is clear that an attempt was made to sharpen the end. This is more evidence that the Americans are training the Georgian people in the art of warfare and this will not be tollerated.

Russian secret police have also uncovered evidence that a six year old Polish boy was seen carrying a "SHIELD" which was cleaverly disguised as a metal waste can cover. The defensive object was made in America. Russian officials are infuriated by this obvious threat to Russia's plan to expand it's empire and impose 'Russia GOOD WILL' on it's neighbors. A nuclear response may be necessary.

A request has been made for Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to offer his interpretation of such shocking evidence. He was not available for comment. Perhaps he was busy licking Putin's shoes.

Bonus Track:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ani_Lorak

It is quite obvious to those of us in the FREE WORLD that Russia is not an 'EQUAL'. Most of Russia's hatred is directed at the United States of America. This hatred is the product of their insane jealousy for the respect and admiration that the U.S. has and continues to receive from the vast majority of the worlds population. Of course there are thos who have made it their goal to attempt to destroy America's immage and would spew forth a flood of unfounded criticizms and lies in order to satify their own twisted sense of justifications. But the fact remains that since the early days of the establishment of the United States of America, people have flocked to her shores by the millions. Many millions actually fled from Russian domination and oppression (Many more were worked until dealth or brutally murdered).This is a thorn in Russia's side. HOW DARE THEY!

Until such a time comes that MILLIONS of people willingly and wantingly desire to become part of Russia, Russia will never be an 'Equal'.

Russia's only true enemy is Russia.

It probably never has crossed the mind of Russians that in order to receive respect you must first 'EARN RESPECT' It is not a gift to be layed at your feet because you are powerful.

Russian 'EGO' prevents them from even understanding such truths.

TRUTH is not to be found in the Russian vocabulary.

Ukraine 'must live without fear'

Mr Cheney aims to strengthen ties with Russia's neighbours

US Vice-President Dick Cheney has said Ukraine has the right to live without fear of invasion, adding that the US stands by its bid for NATO membership.

Mr Cheney met both the prime minister and president in Kiev, the last stop of a tour aimed at underlining support for US allies in the former Soviet Union.

Mr Cheney reassured the president that the US had a "deep and abiding interest" in Ukraine's security.

Analysts fear Ukraine could be the next flashpoint between Russia and the West.

"We believe in the right of men and women to live without the threat of tyranny, economic blackmail or military invasion or intimidation," Mr Cheney said, in an apparent reference to Russia's military intervention in Georgia.

'Hostage'

Mr Cheney arrived in Ukraine just days after the country was plunged into political turmoil.

Earlier this week, Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko's party blocked a motion condemning Russia's actions in Georgia, and sided with the opposition to vote for a curb on the president's powers.

Members of President Viktor Yushchenko's party walked out of the coalition government in protest, leading the president to warn that he could be forced to call a snap general election.

Mr Cheney urged the politicians to heal their divisions and be "united domestically first and foremost".

"Ukraine's best hope to overcome these threats is to be united," he said following separate meetings with Mr Yushchenko and his former ally turned political rival, Yulia Tymoshenko.

Mr Cheney expressed support for Ukraine's bid to become a member of Nato.

"Ukrainians have a right to choose whether they wish to join Nato, and Nato has a right to invite Ukraine to join the alliance when we believe they are ready and that the time is right," he said.

Russia is strongly opposed to any further expansion eastwards of Nato, and is furious that Ukraine and Georgia have been told that, one day, they will be offered membership.

But Mr Cheney - recognizing Ukraine's contributions to NATO missions in Afghanistan and Kosovo - said that no country beyond NATO would be able to block Ukraine's membership bid.

President Yushchenko says Ukraine is a hostage in a war waged by Russia against ex-Soviet bloc states.

The strategically-located country is important to Russia, with pipelines that carry Russian gas to European consumers and its Black Sea port, home to a key Russian naval base.

Russia has a powerful tool at its disposal, namely the large ethnic Russian population in Ukraine's southern province of Crimea.

Open aggression

Mr Yushchenko has restricted Russia's naval operations, and insists Moscow must leave when an inter-state treaty expires in 2017.

Ukraine has said it is ready to make its missile early warning systems available to European nations following Russia's conflict with Georgia.

Mr Cheney's visit comes at an awkward time for President Yushchenko, with the country's largely pro-Western ruling coalition divided in its attitude toward Russia.

The leaders' faltering relationship has now boiled over into open aggression, with Mr Yushchenko threatening to dissolve parliament and call a snap election.

The president has been a staunch supporter of his Georgian counterpart, Mikhail Saakashvili.

But Ms Tymoshenko has avoided outright condemnation of Russia, leading analysts to suggest she may be hoping for Moscow's backing in a possible bid for the presidency in 2010.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/world/europe/04ukraine.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=ukraine&st=cse&oref=slogin

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/06/world/06cheney.html?scp=2&sq=ukraine&st=cse

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12060201

http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12052710

1. First he calls out Russia for trying to reclaim Soviet land.
2. Then he strongly reaffirms U.S. support for Georgia, unilaterally committing the entire American people to subsidizing Georgia's economic and military recovery and giving the Georgians more (false?) hope for eventually joining NATO.
3. Then he makes more promises to Ukraine.
4. Now he's accusing the Kremlin of "reverting to old tactics of intimidation and using 'brute force.' "

What's next? Is he going to take off his shoe and start banging it on the table? Is he trying to deliberately provoke Russia? Maybe he's the one living in 1989. I don't excuse Russia's behavior towards Georgia, but this counteraggression from the veep is probably crossing some sort of line. Keep it up, and he might just get the Russians angr---wait a minute....