X-Captive Nations Recognize Russian Treachery

Pain and suffering create long-term memory, knowledge and expectations. Reading about someone’s pain and suffering is indirect, mediated and inferential, and, consequently, when it is politically expedient, those who experience knowledge by description are likely to disregard first-person experiences.

That is the situation that all of the x-captive nations are facing today. They had been enslaved by Moscow for centuries but today they are free, independent and sovereign countries with varying degrees of democratic development. But each one harbors fresh memories of Russian repression, oppression, occupation and bondage.

The free world did not recognize the plight of all of the captive nations during World War II and since then it has demonstrated mild interest in their historical pain and suffering. It never truly comprehended their captivity as well as their desire to distance themselves as far as possible from Moscow. Free countries refused to hear the former captive nations. Then add to this mixture Russia’s vast nuclear stockpile and active militarization and the free world became paralyzed, long on superficial political platitudes but short on comprehension and action.

Consequently, the x-captive nations have been left to their own designs. They have been warning the free world about potential Russian revanchism that could lead to their re-subjugation. Their fears came true when Russia invaded Georgia and then Ukraine in February 2014. Their panic and their insistence on visible NATO presence in their countries spiked.

Individually and collectively, the x-captive nations have been striving to improve their armed forces’ capabilities to defend themselves against Russian invasion, which they believe has moved to the front burner. Last week Latvia said it is building a fence along its border with Russia while all captive nations are pointing to Ukraine as proof that their countries – and indeed and entire free world – are in danger of being overrun by Russian armies.

Linas Linkevičius, Lithuanian minister of foreign affairs, has been one of the outspoken critics of the free world’s political myopia. He shares this level of understanding with Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaitė. In a recent article in EurActiv he chastised the free world for paying too much attention to not provoking Russia and warned about the dangers of misguidedly acting in a “pragmatic and responsible manner” with Russia.

The Lithuanian official recalled that at the 2008 NATO-Russia Summit in Bucharest, Russian President Putin urged the West not to cooperate with Ukraine, claiming that the country is an artificial creation, rather than a state. “That seemed to have set off an alarm clock. However, it was not heard, or the West comfortably chose not to hear it. Ukraine experienced the impact six years later, while Georgia witnessed warfare on its territory soon after, in August,” he wrote.

Many countries feign deafness with regards to Russian explicit and implicit threats.

“With Russian actions in Georgia, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, areas of the sovereign country were occupied. The protests of the international community, NATO and the EU were forgotten within several months and the ‘pragmatic and responsible’ position had the upper hand, i.e. cooperation with Russia was going on as usual. Russia did not ask for anything; it was the West that took the role as usual because ‘isolation is harmful, not profitable,’ etc.,” Linkevičius wrote.

Today, too, with Russia invading Ukraine and occupying Crimea and the eastern oblasts, the free world is choosing perilous pragmatic and responsible actions such as limited sanctions while other activities that will isolate Russia or ban it from the global table have not been enacted. In reality, business with Russia goes on as usual.

Linkevičius noted in his commentary that Russia responds forcefully to signs of US and free world weakness. Sadly, Moscow has always been offered a range of weak reactions by its paper tiger opponents.

“We should have learned from our mistakes, shouldn’t we? As soon as we loosen the reins, the Kremlin sees it as a sign of our weakness, as another opportunity, or even an encouragement to act with more energy, to demand or negotiate on the new ground ‘gained,’” he opined.

Linkevičius pointed out that the key to ending the war with Ukraine is in the Kremlin but with new conflicts emerging, notably in the Middle East, some leaders are suggesting that Russia should be forgiven its sins. The military conflict in Syria, for example, could be meant to deflect attention away from Russia’s war with Ukraine.

“Suggestions are now being made that Russia could be readmitted to the G8 club, even though Russia does not ask for it. Investment is being made in projects such as Nord Stream, which can undermine Europe’s unity,” he wrote. “Nord Stream II has nothing to do with Europe’s energy security, and makes no economic sense, except the geopolitical ‘benefit’ of eliminating Ukraine and still heavier dependence of Europe on Russian suppliers.”

Linkevičius concluded that Russia has not changed its behavior and neither has the free world, which comes to play a pragmatic and responsible football (soccer) match with Moscow only to find the latter adding elements of wrestling and rugby to the contest. Game over for the West.

Poland, Ukraine’s neighbor, situated in harm’s way of a Russian invasion of western Europe, is another country that appreciates Moscow’s threat and has been calling for active global support of Ukraine. During a recent visit to Kyiv by Polish President Andrzej Duda, the first since his election last August, the Polish leader declared that Ukraine is his country’s strategic partner.

That was a significant admission in these difficult times and harkens back to an old observation that if Ukraine falls so too will Poland.

Also fearing Russian belligerence, Poland is seeking to reaffirm its role as Ukraine’s biggest EU ally with pledges of more financial and diplomatic support in an effort to reassure Kyiv that the West – or at least those x-captive nations that have been accepted into western structures – have not forgotten about its nearly two-year war with Russia.

“Ukraine is a great strategic partner of Poland,” said Duda at a joint press conference in the Ukrainian capital. “Ukraine’s sovereignty is one of the major issues for our country.”

 Declarations such as this should send a strong message to Washington and other free world capitals as well as to Moscow that x-captive nations will band together.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and his Polish counterpart said Warsaw had agreed to open up a 1 billion euro ($1.09 billion) currency swap to promote bilateral trade and ease some pressure on cash-strapped Kyiv. Officials said Poland is also increasing diplomatic support for Ukraine’s intentions to achieve visa-free travel to the EU (which was granted last Friday), and providing advice on continued economic reform. Compared with Vice President Joe Biden who visited Kyiv earlier, Warsaw did not dwell relentlessly about the importance of squashing rampant corruption.

“Poland should be an example to other EU countries,” Poroshenko remarked, adding that Warsaw had agreed to help Ukrainian businesses and exporters preparing to enter the EU market.

Krzysztof Szczerski, Duda’s foreign policy adviser, was quoted as saying that the visit was primarily to reassure Poroshenko that Poland was still committed to its strategic relationship with Ukraine.

“We all know that in these big geopolitical games Ukraine has been somehow sidelined by the situation in Syria,” Szczerski said. “We also see that in the internal discussions within the EU in terms of extending the sanctions against Russia there is a shifting of the mood. You can expect big steps in terms of Polish aid to support the macroeconomic stability of Ukraine in the coming future.”

The difference in attitudes is striking, emphasizing have and have not experiences with bondage. The United States and old Europe do not understand this. If the x-captive nations are doomed to expect only tepid support from the free world, then they will have to seize the opportunity and create a sovereign alternative that will ensure them of their all-inclusive independence – political, economic, commercial and military.

Obviously, this regional, silo approach does not conform to a global environment that calls for partnerships. But new Europe may be left out in the cold with no alternatives if it doesn’t act on behalf of its own security.

After all, the x-captive nations are quite aware that Russia has not ceased dreaming of the day when it will restore its prison of nations.

Free World Still Doesn’t Get It about Ukraine & Russian Imperialism

For all intents and purposes, the free world still doesn’t understand what is happening with Ukraine and the 19-month-old war with Russia. The prime example of this dangerous state of affairs is a recent headline for Mark Adomanis’ article in Forbes: “Ukraine’s Politics are still Badly Broken.”

Still badly broken? It’s only been two dozen years since Ukraine declared its independence from Russian domination, thereby establishing a modern, independent country. In the course of that brief period of time Ukraine has had to deal with repeated efforts by Russia to re-subjugate it by way of fabricated national elections that brought to power leaders that have been obligated to Moscow rather than to the Ukrainian nation. But the people prevailed.

Finally, Russia refused to tolerate any longer Ukraine’s independence and invaded its former captive nation and has been waging a war since February 2014 with most of the world viewing it as a digital war game, a lab experiment or an academic discussion.

Truthfully, has the Ukrainian nation – the people – had the opportunity to fully shed itself of a corrupt Russian mentality, elect a genuinely pro-Ukrainian democratic government, rid itself of homegrown kleptocracy and crooks, and fix its politics?

It seems as if not one national leader understands the gravity of Ukraine’s circumstance – except Ukraine’s President Poroshenko and Russia’s President Putin – the former is endeavoring to preserve it and the latter to destroy it. All of the other democratic or undemocratic presidents and prime ministers – and pundits – don’t. They are treating Ukraine as if it had a 200-year record of governance that has merely fallen on hard times. They are treating Ukraine as if its leaders and people have had time on their hands to contemplate adequately the domestic calamities that have afflicted them, the least of which is the Russia invasion, and have opted to accept the corruption and dishonest officials or delayed reacting to it. Actually, all countries have corruption but not every country has Russia like Ukraine does.

Similar demands have not been made of any other country in history after so short a period of freedom.

Vice President Joe Biden’s much-heralded visit to Ukraine last week is another similar case in point. In his anticipated speech in the Verkhovna Rada, while admitting that he didn’t want to sound as if he was hectoring and lecturing Ukrainian lawmakers – and by association the Ukrainian people – Biden, in fact, was doing that and more. He chided Ukrainians that this was their last chance to make it right.

Reiterating several times that Ukrainians – the people and their elected officials – have to do more and to work harder to get out of the mess that they’re in, Biden urged: “It may be your last moment. Please for the sake of the rest of us, selfishly on my part, don’t waste it. Seize the opportunity. Build a better future for the people of Ukraine.”

Biden correctly emphasized his point “for the sake of the rest of us” and he also noted that if Ukraine fails, everyone else will fail. Indeed, if Ukraine is again submerged into the Russian imperial abyss, the United States, Europe and others will suffer by having to deal with a re-energized Russia.

However, what are the US, Europe and Euro-Atlantic political and military structures doing to preserve Ukrainian independence and sovereignty for future generations? When Poland and France were invaded by Nazi Germany, the free world didn’t quibble about what to do or reproach the victims about domestic corruption.

Vice President Biden also condescendingly reminded the Ukrainian legislators about the legacy of Maidan and the martyred Heavenly Hundred and their obligation to ensure that sacrifices of the fighters in Kyiv two years ago will not be in vain. That was hardly an appropriate reminder for a nation that has also endured the pain and suffering of centuries of invasions, oppression, imprisonment, killings, bloodshed, Russification, Holodomor and other crimes perpetrated by invaders.

But, on a positive side, Biden expressed support for Ukraine’s battle against Russian invaders, admonished Russia for being an international bully, and emphasized that Crimea was and will be a part of Ukraine and the US will never accept its occupation.

“We will not recognize any nation having a sphere of influence. Sovereign states have the right to make their own decisions and choose their own alliances. Period. Period.

“In the 21st century, nations cannot – and we cannot allow them to redraw borders by force. These are the ground rules. And if we fail to uphold them, we will rue the day. Russia has violated these ground rules and continues to violate them. Today Russia is occupying sovereign Ukrainian territory. Let me be crystal clear: The United States does not, will not, never will recognize Russia’s attempt to annex the Crimea. It’s that saying – that simple. There is no justification.

“And as Russia continues to send its thugs, its troops, its mercenaries across the border, Russian tanks and missiles still fill the Donbas. Separatist forces are organized, commanded and directed by Moscow – by Moscow.

“So the United States will continue to stand with Ukraine against Russian aggression,” Biden said echoing President Ronald Reagan’s famous pledge to Ukrainian Americans “Your fight is our fight. You will prevail.”

Biden’s assurances were welcome and needed but for Ukraine to succeed today against Russia, more than words will be needed. His description of Russia was spot on so what will be done to convert Russia into a non-belligerent member of the community of independent countries?

The imperfect and ineffective Minsk accords will not help Ukraine overcome the problems the Vice-President iterated. They are merely instruments to temporarily cease the killings though Ukrainian soldiers continue to lose their lives in battle with Russians. The one and only way to end the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-15 is to force Russia to put down its weapons and depart from Ukraine. Period. Anything less would be tantamount to surrendering to Russia and ceding a portion of Ukraine’s sovereignty to Moscow.

The sanctions against Russia that Biden cited are good for they show moral if not political support for Ukraine. But dollars and tanks are also required to help Ukraine triumph.

The Vice President announced some $190 million in new American assistance to help Ukraine fight corruption, strengthen the rule of law, implement critical reform, bolster civil society, and advance energy security. According to him, that brings Washington’s total of direct aid to almost $760 million, in addition to loan guarantees since the war started. Perhaps the Vice President is not aware that Ukrainian civil society is already very advanced and not threatened by Kyiv.

“And that is not the end of what we're prepared to do if you keep moving,” he added without being specific but intoning the ubiquitous “if” caveat.

Indeed, with the world’s fate being predicated upon Ukraine’s success in the war with Russia, then Ukraine needs an updated version of Lend Lease, which saved Europe from Nazi domination.

In addition to lecturing and reminding Ukrainians of their suffering, Biden was also folksy, especially when speaking about the political perils of tampering with accepted pension ages. “Hell, we're having trouble in America dealing with it. We're having trouble. To vote to raise the pension age is to write your political obituary in many places,” he quipped.

Just like America experienced many phases in its democratic and political development, Ukraine too will undergo them in due course. Just like America, Ukraine will deal with corruption and organized crime, adjust its governance from Soviet-style central command mechanisms to perhaps a version of American federalism, it will build a strong economy that will trade with economies around the world, and it will mobilize a strong, patriotic, pro-Ukrainian military that will make Russia think twice about crossing its border.

Despite Biden’s good neighborly but middling remarks to the Ukrainian nation, it is evident that America remains platonically supportive of Ukraine.

But America must genuinely and credibly stand with Ukraine; America must declare Ukraine to be its strategic partner, and America must give it a chance to reach the next level of its development by helping Ukraine prevail in the war with Russia and its attempts to re-subjugate it.

Otherwise, as Vice-President Biden correctly prophesized, the free world will also fail.

In my next blog, I will offer a few recent examples of how x-captive nations are addressing 21^st century Russian aggression.

International Human Rights Day 2015

Thursday is Human Rights Day.

Sixty-seven years ago, the recently-established United Nations, after being birthed with the words “We, the Peoples …,” felt compelled to raise the international community’s awareness about persistent human rights violations around the post-WW2 world and accentuate the need for comprehensive respect for human rights by codifying a new registry of do’s and don’ts.

The United Nations ratified on December 10, 1948, a document called the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that enshrined 20 principles, which its member-states pledged to uphold. The UN’s wasn’t the first attempt to simultaneously recognize mankind’s brutality against itself and the need to put an end to it. In the course of history, nations around the world tried to recognize, designate, adopt, ratify and declare their respect human rights with mixed results. Beyond the declarations’ memorable, quotable passages, adherence has not been universal even by the authors.

The preamble to the UN version states: “Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people…Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations.”

Article 5 further states: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

Article 15 points out: “Everyone has the right to a nationality.”

During the time of the Soviet Russian empire, Ukrainian political prisoners believed that recognizing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights would benefit their cause and announced that they would commemorate December 10 as Human Rights Day in the concentration camps.

Without a doubt, the anniversary should be remembered and appropriately observed today. Supporting human rights is neither liberal or conservative, left or right. Human rights are universally applicable to all human beings, and they are relevant each day – every day, and if you doubt it, just read the newspapers. Recognizing the need for respecting human rights creates a framework for a better future for our descendants. It reemphasizes an age-old agenda of behavior that could ensure dignified lives for successive generations. It offers benefits for an entire spectrum of ideas, ideologies, philosophies and lifestyles. Human rights also include religious, cultural and national rights and the fulfillment of the latter usually guarantees the previous three.

Publicly raising awareness about human rights also imbues today’s impressionable youth with benevolent concepts and behavior that can mentor them as they mature into tomorrow’s leaders.

It is hardly surprising that governments violate human rights, but human rights treaties help to explain why these abuses are wrong and they are tools with which states, governments and rulers can be held accountable.

Critics of human rights accords have said they are ineffective because courts in some countries are too weak or corrupt to enforce them and their rulers are in the forefront of perpetuating violations. However, their codification gives the public a guiding star about how its government – as well as foreign ones – should behave.

As for the revolting associated topic of human rights lawbreakers, they must be driven out into the sunlight where hopefully they and their barbaric behavior will wither. Denying their existence, sweeping them and their crimes under the rug, will perpetuate their felonies and the pain and suffering they create.

Human rights defenders, their passive supporters and civilians continue to be the targets of abuse, physical and verbal attacks, and threats to their lives. In a number of countries they face harassment, unwarranted prosecution, criminalization and even imprisonment for their peaceful and legitimate activities. Many are in fact killed. Last year, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, observed: “It is time for all OSCE participating states to move from words to deeds and to provide more effective protection to those who strive to promote and safeguard human rights in our countries.”

A case in point about the comprehensive range of rights violations is Russia, whose rulers behave how they wish in their country, region and occupied territories like Crimea, completely ignoring the rights and liberties of nations while exporting terror to foreign countries. Freedom House has included Russia in its list of countries that have become less free in recent years witness Russia’s crackdown against the media, NGOs, LGBT, opponents of Putin and non-Russians like ethnic Ukrainians.

Whether tsarist, communist, soviet or federal, Russia has been a recidivist violator of every conceivable right without regard for international treaties. Global organizations such as the United Nations and countries like the United States have tended to cower behind an ill-fated hope that Moscow’s crimes would go unnoticed before they are forced to take action to stop Russia like the free world did with Hitler. They feel more comfortable treating Russia like the 800-pound gorilla in the room while making alliances with it against the latest enemy du jour.

Without delving into history’s yellowed pages, since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine 18 months ago, its violations have mounted. Beyond the mere fact of the invasion, which violates the UN Charter, the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-15 has caused grief to countless Ukrainians and other x-captive nationalities, resulted in the death of some 8,000 Ukrainian civilians and soldiers most recently during times of a ceasefire, and given Moscow another opportunity to violate the liberties and human rights of prisoners of war, civilians in Ukraine and ethnic Ukrainians in Russia.

The Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, located precariously in Kharkiv, near war-torn occupied eastern Ukraine, has detailed Russia’s gross violations of human rights against Ukrainians.

“Ukrainian human rights activists believe that more than 87% of Ukrainian soldiers and 50% of civilians taken prisoner by Kremlin-backed, pro-Russian militants in Donbas have been subjected to torture or ill-treatment. What is more, in over 40% of the so-called ‘interrogations’ and control over them, key roles were played by mercenaries from the Russian Federation or people who identified themselves as Russian military personnel.  

“The coalition Justice for Peace in Donbas has released a report titled “Those Who Survived Hell.” The study is based mainly on a survey of 165 people held prisoner by the militants. In many cases even those who were not themselves tortured report witnessing or hearing about the torture of others. 33% of the soldiers and 16% of civilians had personally witnessed a death as the result of torture,” Halya Coynash wrote in a report on the group’s website. “Almost 75% of the civilians taken prisoner had been threatened with firearms or other weapons.”

The study showed that more than 87% of Ukrainian soldiers and volunteer fighters captured had faced especially brutal treatment, physical violence, humiliation, as well as deliberate maiming. 

In another example of Russia’s human rights violations, this one against a civilian, a librarian, Coynash wrote: “A Moscow court has upheld the house arrest until December 27 imposed on Natalya Sharina, director of the Ukrainian Literature Library in Moscow. While the renowned Memorial Human Rights Centre has declared Sharina a political prisoner, the pro-Kremlin NTV channel has come out with a 15-minute program of unadulterated, if deranged, hate speech. 

“Sharina’s lawyer Ivan Pavlov notes that the 15-minute program, presented by Savva Morozov, still fails to explain what exactly the library director is supposed to be guilty of. If of circulating extremist books, then the entire staff of the library should be jailed, as well as the whole Moscow Department of Culture as an organized criminal gang.” 

As reported, on October 28, armed OMON (special mobile riot police units) officers carried out searches of the Ukrainian Literature Library in Moscow, Sharina’s home, as well as that of the Head of the Association of Ukrainians of Russia, Valery Semenenko. Sharina was taken into custody.

Then there is the ongoing case of Ukrainian pilot and parliamentarian Nadiya Savchenko, who was kidnapped to Russia, imprisoned and now is being subjected to a tedious, unjust trial that is expected to continue for some time.

Coynash wrote: “Vladimir Markin, official representative of Russia’s Investigative Committee, believes that the sentence passed on Ukrainian ex-pilot and MP will be ‘harsh.’ This something (or somebody) obviously allowed him to flagrantly ignore fundamental principles of a fair trial and pre-empt the court in declaring Savchenko guilty. Markin stated that he expected a harsh sentence because those crimes that Nadiya Savchenko committed are clearly regulated by Russian Federation legislation since the crime was committed against Russian citizens.”

Savchenko, who wears a t-shirt emblazoned with a large Ukrainian Tryzub or an embroidered shirt while in the defendant’s cage, is accused of complicity in the death of two Russian journalists who were killed in mortar fire on June 17, 2014. Coynash pointed out that there is no evidence that Igor Kornelyuk and Anton Voloshin were deliberately targeted. They had not been provided by the State-controlled Pyervy Kanal with bulletproof vests, etc., and were in an area where fierce fighting was taking place between Kremlin-backed militants and Ukrainian soldiers. 

The prosecution claims that Savchenko climbed up a television tower and, at a distance of some 2.5 kilometers noticed the journalists and informed members of the Aider volunteer battalion of their location. Neither the binoculars nor the radio system that the prosecution alleges were used to do this have been produced, Coynash said. Savchenko had already been captured by Kremlin-backed militants in the Luhansk oblast when the two journalists were killed. The defense proved from mobile telephone records and witness reports that Savchenko was captured at around 10 a.m., about 90 minutes before the two journalists came under fire. 

Savchenko has announced that she will resume her hunger strike after the verdict goes into effect but it will be a dry hunger strike - this time without water.

The verdict is expected around December 24, Coynash said, “While the Kremlin may indeed be hoping to time it around Christmas to minimize attention, it cannot seriously be expecting a heavy sentence on a PACE delegate whose release has been demanded by all democratic countries and European structures to go unnoticed.” 

Russia’s cynical disregard for its violations of human rights is most evident in its ludicrous attempt to declare itself immune from international prosecution for the crime of denying human rights. According to Coynash, this effort was afforded fast-track treatment and adopted on December 4. In other words, this bill gives the Russian Constitutional Court the right to declare it “impossible” to implement international rulings on Russian territory.

Wrote Coynash: “Russia’s parliament has moved closer to allowing the Constitutional Court to decide that international court rulings can be flouted if they are deemed to contradict Russia’s Constitution. Since the very law is in breach of this same Constitution, there seems every reason to suspect that the law will be invoked whenever Moscow does not wish to comply with international law.

“Russia’s invasion and annexation of Crimea demonstrated the Kremlin’s attitude to international norms, and this law would doubtless be used to try to avoid the legal suits and massive settlements likely to be awarded over that act of aggression.

“Most disturbingly, the bill purports to be implementing a judgment passed by the Constitutional Court on July 14 which stated that ‘Russia, as an exception, may derogate from execution of its obligations if such a derogation is the only possible means of avoiding infringement of fundamental constitutional principles.’”

Citing Anne Brasseur, president of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Russia has not yet fully implemented some 1,500 judgments, many of which concern particularly serious human rights violations and/or complex structural problems, Coynash wrote. Brasseur emphasized that implementation of ECHR judgments is a legal obligation binding on all parties to the Convention and that there cannot be any “selective implementation.” 

This bill will undoubtedly serve as another grave blow to justice, democracy and liberty in Russia, occupied Crimea and other territories invaded and annexed by Moscow. And the list of Moscow’s atrocities goes on and on.

However, the situation may not be as hopeless as it seems. Commemorations of Human Rights Day at all levels should celebrate human rights won, mourn those lost, and include strong condemnation of Russia’s violations but without Russian participation. With human rights being attacked around the world, the global campaign to reform Russia and make it worthy of inclusion in the international fraternity of democratic, humanitarian nations must be spearheaded by civil society, non-governmental organizations, and grassroots groups upon which democratic countries are built. Political leaders are useless because they tend to criticize Moscow and then turn around and shake hands with the likes of Vladimir Putin.

Simone Veil, former minister of state of France, pointed out in a speech at the 61st Annual UN DPI/NGO Conference in 2008 that “NGOs have a vocation to focus attention upon those whose rights are insufficiently protected. Because of their diversity, because of their independence, it is easier for them to defend different points of view, different interests even when those points of view are contradictory.”

NGOs must not only urge their local and national political leaders, global organizations like the United Nations, and news media to pay attention to human rights and their offenders, but they must fight the good fight with their wallets. Many corporations, consultants, academics and government officials believe that it is normal to conduct daily business with companies in outlaw countries such as Russia.

Recently, speakers at a UN preview of a human rights movie called “Rosewater,” sponsored by the US Permanent Mission to the UN, urged the need for civil society to force corporations to stop doing business with violators. This strategy could be more important than signing petitions to governments, they said.

Civil society should make life difficult for businesses that do not insist on human rights adherence in countries where they do business like Russia. Consequently, it is incumbent on civil society to ensure that sales of companies that fail to support human rights precipitously tumble in those nefarious countries, in the United States and elsewhere.

It’s the least free peoples around the world can do to honor the legacy of Human Rights Day and the memory of its defenders and martyrs.

For more information about Human Rights Day visit http://www.un.org/en/events/humanrightsday/.

UN 2030 Agenda: More than Climate Change

After Intense, last-minute negotiations among member states and NGO stakeholders, the 193-member UN General Assembly formally adopted late last September the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, along with a set of bold new global goals, which are being hailed as a universal, integrated and transformative vision for a better world.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – previously known as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – is the direct descendant of the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) that concluded this year.

“The new agenda is a promise by leaders to all people everywhere. It is an agenda for people, to end poverty in all its forms – an agenda for the planet, our common home,” declared UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at the UN Sustainable Development Summit, which witnessed the adoption of the agenda that will stay in effect as a global guiding star for the next 15 years.

Speaking to the press after the adoption of the agenda, Ban said: “These goals are a blueprint for a better future. Now we must use the goals to transform the world. We will do that through partnership and through commitment. We must leave no-one behind.”

The UN chief, civil society, academics and scientists, cheered the new framework with its inclusion of many human interests and needs in an agenda for shared prosperity, peace and partnership. “It conveys the urgency of climate action. It is rooted in gender equality and respect for the rights of all,” Ban said, urging the world leaders and others convened at the event in New York City to successfully implement the agenda by launching “renewed global partnership.”

Justifiably, climate change, global warming and the environment have attracted almost all of the fanfare leading up to the 2030 Agenda’s adoption and since then. The attention these concepts are attracting has been compounded by the COP21 conference, which is currently being held in Paris. World leaders are expected to adopt a new climate-friendly course that will for the first time in more than 20 years of UN negotiations strive to achieve a legally binding and universal agreement on the climate, with the aim of keeping global warming below 2°C.

“You are here today to write the script for a new future. A future of hope and promise – of increased prosperity, security and dignity for all,” UN’s Ban told the world leaders at the opening of the summit. “Let us build a durable climate regime with clear rules of the road that all countries can agree to follow. Paris must mark a turning point. We need the world to know that we are headed to a low-emissions, climate-resilient future, and that there is no going back.”

However, the monumental and optimistic 2030 Agenda is not only about climate abuse and its expected deleterious effect on future generations. As with the MDGs, the 2030 Agenda focuses on a wide range of climate, sustainability, education, gender, health, environment and human rights issues. Embedded in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’s 17 principles and 140-plus subsidiary points are many references to the urgency of protecting human rights. Human rights include national rights and the fulfillment of the latter usually guarantees the former. Conventional wisdom states that this hopeful, comprehensive package will make life easier and better for future generations.

Among the numerous references to human rights, we find the following two salient passages:

“We envisage a world of universal respect for human rights and human dignity, the rule of law, justice, equality and non-discrimination; of respect for race, ethnicity and cultural diversity; and of equal opportunity permitting the full realization of human potential and contributing to shared prosperity. A world which invests in its children and in which every child grows up free from violence and exploitation. A world in which every woman and girl enjoys full gender equality and all legal, social and economic barriers to their empowerment have been removed. A just, equitable, tolerant, open and socially inclusive world in which the needs of the most vulnerable are met.”

“We reaffirm the importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as other international instruments relating to human rights and international law. We emphasize the responsibilities of all States, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations, to respect, protect and promote human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction of any kind as to race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, disability or other status.”

But with wars and sanctioned national malice still plaguing the world, the obvious lack of global emphasis on these painful issues raises the question “what are the UN and global community thinking about?” Will it benefit sustainable development to sweep ethnic prejudice and violence and wars under the carpet? Should Russia’s war against Ukraine and human rights violations against Ukrainians and minority groups be overlooked for the sake of a successful conclusion to COP21? If Russia wages war and violates human rights with impunity will it voluntarily abide by new climate regulations?

Of course not and that’s where Ukrainian and other former captive nations’ NGOs, as well as their Permanent Missions to the United Nations along with indigenous Crimean people, and relevant human rights and disarmament groups have an opportunity to compel the UN and global community to remain focused on freedom, democracy, peace and stability by recognizing and punishing recidivist international aggressors like Russia.

President Poroshenko of Ukraine, who attended COP21, speaking at the United Nations on the eve of the ratification of the 2030 Agenda, declared Ukraine’s support for the UN Development Agenda but poignantly pointed out, “There will be no sustainable development without peace and freedom.”

Indeed, how can the global community be expected to evolve ecologically for the benefit of future generations when one outlaw member of the international community wages war against a neighboring state and violates the human rights of its citizens?

Poroshenko said further: “Ukraine’s bitter experience reveals that peace and freedom are principal pre-conditions for achieving the SDGs. Sustainable development is not achievable where explosions are heard and peaceful people are killed. It is not achievable where aggressive ideologies advocating suppression of some nations by other nations reign and key human rights and freedoms are violated.

“Strengthening universal peace and promoting larger freedom should become a driving and unifying force behind our collective efforts towards achieving the SDGs.

“Today Ukraine has to implement so much needed systemic reforms while opposing the Russian aggressor that tries to undermine the democratic European development the Ukrainian people have chosen.

“As a result of Russia’s treacherous annexation of the Ukrainian Crimea and its aggression in the Ukrainian Donbas region, thousands of people have been killed.”

As far as environmental concerns go, the Ukrainian president pointed out that Russia’s war against Ukraine has also increased environmental and epidemiological threats, as well as the risks of social exclusion.

Poroshenko assured the global community at the UN that Ukrainians are ecologically aware and focused today, first and foremost, on:

·         fighting corruption;

·         ensuring equal opportunities and social justice;

·         effective public health system;

·         promoting decent work;

·         ensuring affordable education for all;

·         promoting innovation development and sustainable infrastructure;

·         ensuring sustainable energy supply;

·         ensuring food security;

·         healthy environment.

These points are also included directly or indirectly in the 2030 Agenda.

Speaking this week at COP21, Poroshenko further noted, “The terrible events that France experienced this tragic November are a daily reality for Ukraine for almost 21 months.” He again placed the blame for Ukraine’s woes directly on Russia, saying that his country “is suffering from terrorism sponsored and promoted by the Russian Federation.” 

Consequently, more than 8,000 Ukrainians, of whom were about 6,000 civilians, lost their lives.

“There can be no compromise on democratic values and principles with terrorists or states sponsoring terrorism,” Poroshenko emphasized.

Convening of COP21 with its pro-climate advocates should give freedom-loving NGOs in the UN system and beyond, the Permanent Missions of the former captive nations, and concurring stakeholders the task of initiating a conversation within the context of the 2030 Agenda about creating a global partnership that would foster and preserve sustainable freedom, liberty, democracy, human rights, stability and peace for future generations while sanctioning Russia for its criminal belligerence.

X-Captive Nations Understand Danger of ‘Russian Partnership’

The murderous rampage by ISIS and the free world’s so-called coalition to defeat the Islamic scourge has again brought to the surface the former captive nations’ distrust and hatred of Russia.

Consequently, Moscow’s erstwhile colonies are not hurrying to join any posse that includes Russia to chase down and destroy ISIS.

Russia’s crimes against each one of them and specifically its current war against Ukraine have convinced them to steer clear of Moscow. The chasm that Russia has dug with its crimes against the former captive nations cannot be filled in even by a global humanitarian or punitive mission.

Indeed, the x-captive nations regard Russia as a terrorist like ISIS.

Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite, a consistent and unambiguous advocate of Ukraine, in 2014, became the first European leader to speak frankly about the Russian aggression in the Donbas region of Ukraine and the occupation of Crimea. Grybauskaite said candidly in an interview with The Washington Post that she saw both the Islamic State and Russia as terrorists.

“Russia is terrorizing its neighbors and using terrorist methods,” the Lithuanian president was quoted as saying by the newspaper.

After the terrorist attacks in Paris, French President Francois Hollande and some other leaders expressed the idea that Russia should be included in a broad coalition against the ISIS. However, not all EU members support this proposal, noting that Russia is an exporter of terrorism and has violated all international norms by invading sovereign Ukrainian territory, annexing Crimea and then continuing its aggression in the eastern oblasts of Ukraine.

According to the Baltic Times, at a meeting with the presidents of Latvia and Estonia, Grybauskaite asserted that Lithuania “will not be participating in any new coalitions that Russia is or wants to be a part of.”

“Russia still occupies the territory of one country and is carrying out direct military actions in another, even two countries – Georgia and Ukraine,” Grybauskaite pointed out.

Estonian President Thomas Hendrik Ilves said: “With all the focus these days on terrorism and on Daesh, we have to still keep in mind that the largest act of aggression since the end of World War II is a continuing process with the annexation of Crimea.”

“And I would say that I think we are all concerned about this sort of falling behind or some kind of development in which we stop paying attention to Crimea, or we even forgive the annexation because of the newer threats. We cannot allow that to happen,” Ilves said, according to the Baltic News Service.

Latvian President Raimonds Vejonis emphasized that the situation in the European Union and on its southern borders should not distract attention from Ukraine, Delfi news agency reported. “Our common task is to keep the issue of Ukraine high on the EU agenda until the full resolution of the Minsk Agreements,” he said.

The Baltic trio, together with Poland, are insisting on utmost firmness regarding Russia. They fear that the conflicts in Syria and Ukraine will be lumped together as some pundits have also suggested by writing that Putin hopes to use Syria to deflect attention from Ukraine.

“These are different crises and we must not link them, we must assess them separately,” Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius told AFP. “It is unacceptable to talk about some kind of trade, concessions or spheres of influence.”

The Latvian Ministry for Foreign Affairs suggested last week Friday that “the Baltic countries should continue to constantly remind the world about the illegal annexation of Crimea. The fight against terrorists and resolving the conflict in Syria should not be at the expense of Ukraine.”

Polish lawmaker Marcin Kierwinski from the liberal Civic Platform (PO) opposition party observed that “The need to settle the IS issue shouldn’t change our position regarding Russia.”

“Even if it’s not officially on the table, Moscow hopes that if the anti-IS coalition sees the light of day, pressure in the case of Ukraine will lessen and a certain number of countries will say, since we’re fighting together, the sanctions shouldn’t be renewed,” Polish analyst Wojciech Lorenz told AFP. “That's what we have to fear.”

The x-captive nations broad unity was accentuated by Eiki Nestor, the president of Estonia’s parliament: “Even now after the tragedy in Paris, this understanding of new democracies, what the three Baltica and Nordic states (have), we’re trying to help Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova to develop, it's very important, especially in Ukraine's case.”

Separately, newly elected Polish President Andrzej Duda observed recently in the website http://www.ji-magazine.lviv.ua that contemporary Russia has nothing to do with democracy.

In addition to violating its own constitution every day, Duda said Russia “is the first European country which has committed military intervention in the affairs of other independent European state, taking away part of its territory” referring to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Russia should not be the focus of any negotiations, he said, adding that the Minsk discussions involving Russia, Ukraine, Germany and France reminded him of Yalta of 1945, at which the free world surrendered parts of Europe to Soviet Russia.

“We cannot accept the fact that Russia should swallow Ukraine by pieces. We are responsible for the integration of European states and the integrity of borders in Europe. Stopping this decaying process will be a triuimph for Europe. To accept a rotten compromise will defeat it,” the Polish president said.

Since the start of the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-15, the former captive nations have proudly and bravely defended Ukraine against the Russian invasion and warned that Russia’s appetite for conquest has not abated. They have also cautioned that the free world shouldn’t betray Ukraine for the sake of an ersatz greater good. They rightly fear that including Russia in the anti-ISIS coalition could lead the free world to halt sanctions against Russia, which would unleash a major backlash against it.

Predictably, France’s Holland is rounding up countries to track down the ISIS killers. However, the x-captive nations have not forgotten his and France’s current offenses. France maintains an honorary consulate in occupied Donetsk which would be akin to the US supporting a consulate in Vichy during WW2. Hollande suggested to Kyiv to negotiate with Russian terrorists in the occupied territories but wouldn’t even consider following his own advice.

I have advocated that the x-captive nations must revive the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, the World Anti-Communist League or the Captive Nations Week Committee for their common defense. They should form global, regional, academic and UN coalitions to defend democracy, liberty and human rights as bulwarks against Russian aggression.

What Ukraine and the former captive nations have experienced in the Russian prison of nations has convinced them that Russia can’t be trusted today – despite the need to destroy ISIS. Their counsel should not be belittled by Islamic terrorists’ victims.

Holodomor, Revolution of Dignity and War

Ukrainians around the world took a moment on Saturday, November 21, to reflect on three significant events in their history that contributed to defining who they are as a nation.

The oldest of the three events is the Russian murder by starvation of 7-10 million Ukrainian men, women and children in 1932-33 – known as Holodomor. This heinous premeditated crime against Ukrainians caused by man-made design is considered an act of genocide by governments and scholars around the world, including Raphael Lemkin, who coined the word genocide for the United Nations soon after it was established.

“Genocide is the crime of destroying national, racial or religious groups,” Lemkin wrote. Certainly Moscow’s intentions with regard to Ukraine over centuries can be similarly explained.

Lemkin further observed about the Holodomor:

“What I want to speak about is perhaps the classic example of Soviet genocide, its longest and broadest experiment in Russification – the destruction of the Ukrainian nation.”

“This is not simply a case of mass murder. It is a case of genocide, of destruction, not of individuals only, but of a culture and a nation. Soviet national unity is being created, not by any union of ideas and of cultures, but by the complete destruction of all cultures and of all ideas save one – the Soviet.

“It is difficult to imagine the calculated death of millions, but history is filled with similar atrocities, of which the Jewish Holocaust is another example. In both cases, the victims were annihilated merely because of their nationality.”

Today, non-Soviet Russia continues to deny the Holodomor as it does all of its crimes against humanity committed against Ukrainians.

Fortunately, since independence, Ukrainians have uncovered numerous additional Russian records that bear witness to Moscow’s guilt. This evidence has supplemented the scholarly research on the subject and added a historical background to the abundant monuments and memorials that have been dedicated to the famine victims around the world. The latest one was unveiled two weeks ago in Washington, DC.

On Saturday, Ukrainians filled St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City for the annual observance, at which Ukrainian diplomats and US officials paid tribute to the martyrs and pointed an accusing finger at Moscow.

William Paul of the US Permanent Mission to the United Nations read a statement from the White House, in which President Obama said he joins Ukrainian Americans and Ukrainians everywhere to mark the catastrophe of millions being starved to death by Stalin’s regime.

Recently appointed Ukrainian Ambassador to the US Valery Chaly likened the Holodomor to the 18-month long Russian war against Ukraine and added the 8,000 killed to the famine figures. He said the Ukrainian nation is facing another attempt at being destroyed by Moscow, but he expressed confidence that Ukraine will persevere but with aid from Washington, DC.

Ambassador Yuriy Sergeyev, Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations, reflected on the validity of remembering the Holodomor. In reply to numerous questions from fellow diplomats at the UN, Sergeyev pointed out that Ukrainians recall the Holodomor and other brutalities against their nation for the sake of “our children and grandchildren.” He said the incredible figure of millions killed can only be attributed to a concentration camp and, poignantly clarifying, that place of forced confinement was called the Soviet Union.

Archbishop Antony of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church urged his fellow Ukrainians never to forget the horror of the Holodomor because if its memory disappears from the memories of people – all people – then the occasion for the crime to be repeated will arise.

“God forbid,” the Archbishop intoned repeatedly.

Yesterday was also the second anniversary of what has become known as the Day of Dignity – the start of the national revolution in 2013 that sought to rid Ukraine of Russia and in the end ousted its corrupt lackey Viktor Yanukovych. Enraged by Yanukovych’s last-minute decision not to sign the European Union accession documents, Ukrainians from across Ukraine, lead mostly by young people, descended on Kyiv and occupied the capital for weeks until Yanukovych finally read the writing on the wall and fled to Russia out of fear for his life. His cronies also hightailed it with him.

What the crooked oligarchs left in their wake was a treasure trove of gaudy and not-so-gaudy stolen and accumulated wealth as well their Russian patron who was left wondering how such a buffoon of a president could have been allowed to lose Ukraine for Russia.

According to satellite photographs, 2 million Ukrainians filled the center of the Ukrainian capital, displaying their disgust with Yanukovych and Russian subjugation, while expressing support for a Ukrainian Ukraine, one that is aligned with Euro-Atlantic structures. The astounding, historical number of peaceful demonstrators could not be disregarded by friend and foe.

As revolutions go, Ukraine’s Revolution of Dignity that began on the Maidan had its share of bloodshed before victory was finally claimed and peace restored. More than 100 defenders of Ukraine were killed by uniformed traitors, who shot at unarmed civilians from rooftops. Ultimately the nation was victorious and all of its denominations – men and women, senior citizens and youth, professionals and workers, Ukrainian and Russian speakers, Catholics, Orthodox, Jews and Muslims – could unite under one Ukrainian flag, one Ukrainian spirit and one Ukrainian cause.

The only casualties on the enemy side were the numerous statues of Lenin – symbols of Russian oppression – that were torn down by the people like the Germans that demolished the Berlin Wall.

As has often happened in Ukrainian history, this triumph was short lived. Putin and his Russian band of imperialists in the Kremlin couldn’t stomach losing Ukraine and their henchmen in Ukraine. Barely two weeks after the end of the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi and before the triumphant cheers of Ukrainians fell silent, Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine by storming the Crimean peninsula and imposing a reign of terror against the local Crimean Tatar population, outlawing their culture and heritage. Within a few weeks, Russia expanded its invasion of Ukraine by attacking the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts.

Even though Soviet Russian communist domination of Eastern Europe and Ukraine came to an end a quarter of a century ago, Moscow’s desire to rebuild its empire and re-imprison the now x-captive nations is avaricious. Russia is still seeking to repair the iron curtain separating free men from slaves.

The Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-15 has raged since then, with some 8,000 soldiers and civilians killed, according to the United Nations. The Ukrainian Armed Forces, National Guard and independent battalions, mobilized in an Anti-Terrorist Operation (ATO) have been heroically defending their country from Russian air and ground attacks in eastern Ukraine. Three distinct sections of Ukraine are currently occupied by enemy forces: Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk.

There seems to be no end in sight to the war despite the free world’s mixed support for Ukraine and sanctions against Russia, which is as culpable of terrorism as is ISIS.

How have these events defined the Ukrainian nation?

The Holodomor shows that Russia will not be restrained in its tactics to destroy the Ukrainian nation – even resorting to starving to death men, women and children.

The Revolution of Dignity shows that the Ukrainian nation will mobilize to defend itself against homegrown and foreign enemies.

And the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-15 shows that Russia’s quest to restore its reprehensible empire is insatiable.

Throughout hardships and sacrifices, Ukrainians have remained undaunted in their commitment to the nation. Ukrainians have learned that freedom and independence aren’t abstract terms. They have been compelled to experience it, live it and defend it every day. They’re really left with one recourse. Thomas Jefferson, among other philosopher-statesmen who have said the price of liberty is eternal vigilance, wrote: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

Keep faith in Ukraine.

X-Captive Nations Mobilize vs. Russian Aggression

This blog was to have appeared last night but in respect for the killed and wounded in the horrible terrorist attacks in Paris, I delayed posting it until today.

The historic words by Colonel Charles E. Stanton voiced in 1917 are quite poignant today: “Lafayette, nous voilà.” (Lafayette, we are here)

East Europeans and the Baltic states are not giving too much credence to western analyses that Putin has abandoned his master plan of subjugating Ukraine in favor of military incursions into Syria. Those x-captive nations are “gravely concerned” especially by regional Russian aggression and have initiated their own defense preparations.

Reuters, The Baltic Times and other news media have reported that leaders of nine Central and Eastern European and Baltic states said in a joint statement on November 4 they were gravely concerned about Russia’s “continuing aggressive posturing” and endorsed a sustainable NATO military presence in the region. (See also my blog “X-Captive Nations United vs. Russian Aggression, Monday, November 9.)

Despite NATO’s vacillation about its mission, the x-captive nations, the countries that were to be beneficiaries of the alliance’s military protection, still believe in its ability and commitment to defend their collective independence.

“We will stand firm on the need for Russia to return to respect of international law as well as of its international obligations, responsibilities and commitments as a pre-condition for a NATO-Russia relationship based on trust and confidence,” they said in the joint declaration.

Polish President Andrzej Duda said NATO simultaneously faces threats from the east and the south, necessitating “more troops, more infrastructure and more common actions” as he and his colleagues urged the alliance to take an active role in safeguarding their and by association global freedom.

Russia’s invasion and occupation of Ukrainian Crimea in February 2014 and Moscow’s support for pro-Kremlin rebels in eastern Ukraine as well as its own involvement in the war have alarmed neighboring Baltic and Eastern European countries.

At the same time, leaders of the NATO alliance have been expressing concern at what they see as Moscow’s growing military presence from the Baltics to Syria after Russia launched air strikes in support of President Bashar al-Assad five weeks ago. However, NATO has been caught without an obvious workable response plan.

News reports noted that the x-captive nations’ declaration also said the leaders would join efforts to secure “a robust, credible and sustainable” allied military presence in the region, and would advocate deeper cooperation between NATO and the European Union.  ‘Hybrid’ warfare, cyber defense, energy security and strategic communication were listed in the statement as key areas needing their attention.

The statement was issued after a meeting in Bucharest, Romania, of heads of state including Lithuania’s Dalia Grybauskaite, Latvia’s Raimonds Vejonis, Estonia’s Toomas Hendrik Ilves, Slovakia’s Andrej Kiska, Bulgaria’s Rosen Plevneliev and Hungary’s Janos Ader.

The talks were co-chaired by Romania’s President Klaus Iohannis and Poland’s President Andrzej Duda. The President of the Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, Jan Hamacek, and Deputy Secretary-General of NATO, Alexander Vershbow, also attended.

Unfortunately, there was no mention of an official Ukrainian presence.

The declaration continues East European leaders’ anxieties about their future in the wake of Russian belligerence that they have voiced publically or privately since the fall of the iron curtain.

At a NATO Foreign Ministers meeting in Antalya last spring, Lithuanian Minister of Foreign Affairs Linas Linkevičius emphasized that Russia has tested the alliance’s vigilance and unity, and called on NATO to ensure a permanent presence of its troops in the Baltic states.

He noted that activity of the Russian fleet had interfered with international shipping and legitimate commerce in the exclusive economic zone of Lithuania. As for the threats from the south, Linkevičius assured that Lithuania would contribute to joint efforts to fight the Islamic State and search for solutions to problems concerning migration at the European level.

At the meeting, Linkevičius called on NATO to continue its open door policy, especially with regard to Eastern European countries, and to keep the attention on Georgia. The participants also discussed NATO’s response to security threats from the east and south. The meeting was attended by the European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Federica Mogherini.

The ministers expressed a consensus about the threat of Russian aggression and increasing military power, and the need to take long-term measures to enhance security in the Alliance’s east region and prevent any possible aggression.

Russia’s enhanced militarization and invasions have prompted several nations to announce plans to boost their military and defense spending. Poland is in the midst of modernizing its armed forces, and the Czech Republic also announced its intention to purchase more weapons. Nordic states also reported Russian aggression along their borders and in the Arctic, with Norway saying it needs to update its defense forces.

The Czech Republic has become the latest European nation to announce the purchase of new weapons to modernize its armed forces, Defense News reported on November 2. Czech Defense Minister Martin Stropnicky said the procurements would allow the military to take part in NATO exercises and help secure the country’s border.

“The reason behind this was, in particular, the deteriorating global security situation, which represents a threat to the security of the Czech Republic and Czech citizens,” said Stropnicky. “After a thorough evaluation of the current risks and threats, the ministry decided to make an effective and adequate response.”

The Czech Republic joins an expanding list of countries in the region looking to bolster their defense capabilities. Its military was expected to add armored personnel carriers and reconnaissance systems, as well as technology to prevent electronic attacks to its inventory and additional weaponry to be used by the army, air force and reserves. Prague increased the military budget for 2015 by 4.2% and was expected to spend $1.78 billion on its military.

Several Central and Eastern European states have also started cutting their defense equipment purchases from Russia and shifting instead to buying from NATO member states, Defense News reported. Slovakia said it was planning to replace old military equipment with new purchases likely coming from NATO member states.

Nordic states have also taken notice of Russia’s military buildup in Arctic with Norway announcing a need to modernize its armed forces, Reuters reported. Norway, a NATO member state, shares a small border with Russia in the Arctic where there has been increased military activity.

“Our neighbor in the east has built up its military capacity, also in areas close to us,” said Admiral Haakon Bruun-Hanssen of Norway’s navy. “They have shown that they are willing to use military force to achieve political ambitions.”

Norway’s defense forces would need more than $21 billion beyond what was budgeted for the next 20 years, Bruun-Hanssen said. Russia’s military actions in both Ukraine and Syria have created uncertainty across Europe. Norway also mentioned it was now facing cyber and terrorist threats, as well.

Norway’s Defense Minister Ine Eriksen Søreide said Western relations with Russia had been permanently altered over Russia’s actions in Ukraine.

“We are faced with a different Russia,” Søreide told CNN. “I want to warn against the fact that some people see this as something that is going to pass. The situation has changed. And it has changed profoundly.”

Other European countries have begun to modernize their defense capabilities amid fear and uncertainty over Russia. Poland has begun a military modernization program at a cost of more than $35 billion. Poland and Sweden signed a military cooperation agreement in September that also cited Russian military fears. Sweden said it had increased its own military spending by 11%.

“Once a sea of peace, the Baltic has become a sea of danger,” observed Polish Defense Minister Tomasz Siemoniak.

Russia has endangered the region and world and disrupted regional and global peace and stability. The x-captive nations are preparing to meet this threat by bolstering their defenses in hopes of changing Russia’s plans.

They at least deserve the active support and involvement of the US and the free world. G20 leaders have their agenda full this weekend, but unfortunately terrorist Russia is in their midst.

X-Captive Nations must Unite vs. Russian Aggression

Twenty-six years ago today, the German people on behalf of the captive nations struck a major blow against the Russian empire by tearing down the infamous Berlin Wall – the physical symbol of the iron curtain that Winston Churchill talked about and Moscow had built to preserve its colonial subjugation.

Germans wielding sledge hammers destroyed the cinderblock, cement and steel structure that divided their nation and the world, allowing the winds of freedom and democracy to sweep into countries that had been oppressed by Russia in some cases for centuries.

This iconic gesture gave hope to millions that perhaps for the first time in their lives the threat of Russian aggression and subjugation would go the way of the Berlin Wall. Unfortunately, the ugly head of historical Russian imperialism and belligerence is still sowing fear and death in Ukraine and beyond.

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2014, other former captive nations – those that were in the USSR and the so-called East European satellites of Moscow – for the most part recognized the latest version of Russian aggression. They’ve expressed their support for Ukraine, condemned Russia and announced renewed efforts to bolster their defenses in case Russia turns its guns against them.

This has not been the case among the countries east of the Caucasus, where most have sided with Russia or haven’t taken sides. Until this month.

During Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko’s recent meeting with Turkmenistani President Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov in Ashgabat, the host country expressed formal support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, according to a report from Agence France-Presse.

Writing in The Diplomat website, Casey Michel observed: “To date, Turkmenistan had remained mum in the 20 months following Russia’s incursion into southern Ukraine. While Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan recognized the Crimean ‘referendum’ to join Russia – although Astana later backpedaled, and now claims support similar support for Ukrainian ‘territorial integrity’ – Ashgabat had kept its silence on the matter, wary of unnecessarily provoking Moscow. But no longer. Nearly two years after the Euromaidan protests first began rocking Ukraine in late 2013, Turkmenistan has tossed its rhetoric behind Kyiv.”

Michel explained this move that he said made sense for Turkmenistan:

“First, the Turkmenistani economy’s tailspin shows no signs of slowing – hence, the outreach for new clients.

“Second, Russia recently unveiled a Caspian militarism the sea that has never seen in the post-Soviet period, effectively quashing any momentum behind a trans-Caspian pipeline, to Turkmenistan’s detriment.

“And third, Russia-Turkmenistan relations are further chilled by a drop-off in gas trade, with Moscow’s import of Ashgabat’s gas continuing its precipitous decline.”

He writer concluded:  “As such, these factors came to a head with Poroshenko’s visit. Instead of the bastion of neutrality Turkmenistan has long presented, Ashgabat suddenly thrust itself into Eurasia’s greatest territorial flashpoint. How – or if – Russia responds will be something to watch.”

Turkmenistani support for Ukraine is important because it shows Russia and third party countries that disapproval of Russian belligerence is growing. It also sends an encouraging signal to countries in its region that they should also discard their Russian yoke.

I have written about the need for a revival of a global democratic, anti-aggression movement akin to the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, the National Captive Nations Committee and the World Anti-Communist League, today known as the World League for Freedom and Democracy. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin alluded to such an alliance in a speech in New York City a year ago.

The threat of Russia restoring its prison of nations cannot be disparaged as the 19-month-long Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-15 demonstrates.

Fortunately, some US military leaders have cautioned that Russian military expansion will definitely endanger not only regional peace and stability but also on a global level.

Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, commander of the US Army Europe, this week warned that Russian military capabilities in the Kaliningrad region and the Suwalki corridor in Poland could hinder the defense of the Baltic states if they should fall victim to Russian military adventurism, reported The Baltic Times. At a meeting with US troops serving in Lithuania at the end of last week, Hodges said that Russian army brigades, a naval brigade, two military airbases, plus part of the Russian Baltic Fleet are already deployed in the Kaliningrad region. 

“Kaliningrad now has the ability to deny access of our Navy or any NATO Navy to come to the Baltic Sea,” Hodges said. “From Kaliningrad Russia can stop from entering coming into the Baltic Sea, and there we have three NATO Allies – Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.”

He added that the possibility for Russia to block access to the Baltic Sea is a “serious threat to our allies and friends.”

Fox News and The Wall Street Journal also reported this week that US military officials have proposed sending more troops to Europe to deter the threat of aggression by Russia and have increased training exercises aimed at countering possible interference with troop transfers by Moscow.

The Wall Street Journal reported that proposals for the deployment of several US brigades in Europe were made this past weekend at the Reagan National Defense Forum in Simi Valley, CA.

The US Army currently has two infantry brigades based in Eastern Europe, totaling some 7,000 soldiers. One other brigade rotates in and out of Europe on a regular basis. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley told the WSJ that he would like to send attack helicopter units and artillery brigades to Europe as well as more rotating brigades.

Gen. Philip Breedlove, supreme allied commander of NATO and a staunch supporter of Ukraine, told the WSJ that decisions on the proposals would be made “in the next couple of months.” Plans for a troop increase must first be developed by the Pentagon, then approved by President Obama and finally funded by Congress. The paper reported that funding for the troop increase would be included in a budget request sent to Congress early next year.

The discussion of such a suggested troop increase comes a day after Defense Secretary Ash Carter warned against Russian aggression in what some have said were his strongest remarks since becoming Pentagon chief this past February. He detailed Russian forces’ “challenging activities” at sea, in the air, in space and in cyberspace. Carter also said Moscow was “violating sovereignty in Ukraine and Georgia and actively trying to intimidate the Baltic states.”

“We do not seek a cold, let alone a hot, war with Russia,” Carter said. “We do not seek to make Russia an enemy. But make no mistake; the United States will defend our interests, our allies, the principled international order, and the positive future it affords us all.”

The x-captive nations can’t wait and hope for the best. They know firsthand the danger of procrastination. The Baltic Times reported that Lithuania and eight more countries approved a declaration in Bucharest last week, warning NATO about Russian threats and calling for increased presence to deter Moscow. Ukraine is hoping that the White House will recognize the global threat of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and actively participate in the defense of Europe and the world.

The former captive nations and the free world are caught in a dilemma – do nothing and watch Russia re-subjugate the Ukraine and the other countries or prevent Russian aggression and risk provoking Moscow into a war that would stretch beyond Ukraine and Syria.

“The challenge here is to deter further aggression without triggering that which you are trying to deter,” Gen. Milley told the WSJ. “It is a very difficult proposition.”

On the one hand, the former captive nations must unite to protect and defend their countries from Russian aggression, they must be supported in this urgent task by the US and NATO, the global political campaign against Moscow must continue relentlessly, and sanctions against Russia must be maintained – and expanded – until Moscow withdraws from the occupied territories.

Otherwise, what the West wishes to avoid and prays will not happen may come to pass by default.