Ukraine Freedom Support Act 2014: Missing only President’s OK

It was an historic nail biter.

With time running out before the midnight deadline that would have shut down the government, the House of Representatives on Thursday, December 11, kept the United States of America functioning and gave Ukraine a cornucopia of essential practical war materiel and funding to help it defend itself against Russia and stabilize its democratic government.

It was the most monumental US legislation about Ukraine since the days of congressional resolutions demanding the release of Ukrainian political prisoners in the Soviet Russian prison of nations.

The last-minute marathon of mobilizing support for the legislation was spearheaded by the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus, a bi-lateral group of legislators who support independent Ukraine, the Ukrainian National Information Service in Washington, DC, Ukrainian Americans and, thanks to social media, Ukrainians in Ukraine and around the world.

“Throughout more than three decades of my professional work, I have occasionally seen strong advocacy efforts on behalf of various Ukraine-related legislation, but never have I seen such intense, concentrated advocacy by the Ukrainian American community and other numerous friends of Ukraine as yesterday afternoon and evening to ensure House passage of S. 2828,” Ukrainian American Orest Deychakiwsky, senior ​​policy adviser of the US Helsinki Commission, was quoted as observing.

The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, passed by the US Senate and the House of Representatives, authorizes much needed practical American military aid and equipment with which Ukraine can defend itself against Russian aggression. It offers Ukraine funding and support for the country’s democratic development and civil society.

The legislation inevitably recognizes Russia’s culpability for invading and destabilizing Ukraine. It further notes that Russia is threatening Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, which must be restored. It also personally chastises Vladimir Putin for waging war against Ukraine.

The law requires the imposition of additional sanctions on Russia, particularly on Rosboronexport, Russia’s main weapons exporter, as well as increasing licensing requirements for the sale of oil extraction technology to Russia. Any Russian company exporting weapons to Syria is also liable for sanctions. In addition, the bill contained a contingency, requiring the president to sanction Gazprom in the event that it interferes with the delivery of gas supplies to NATO members or to Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova.

“This legislation is the result of months of bipartisan work in the House and Senate to send an unmistakable message to Vladimir Putin and the entire world that the United States fully supports the people of Ukraine in their desire to remain an independent, democratic nation. Putin’s blatant disregard for Ukraine’s sovereignty demanded a bold response, and that’s exactly what this bill provides. Ukrainians are willing to fight to defend their country against Russian aggression,” said Senate Foreign Relations ranking member Bob Corker (R-TN), a sponsor.
“This legislation will help the Ukrainians match the military and intelligence capability of the Russians, who have provided weapons and other lethal aid to separatists in Donetsk, Mariupol and other portions of eastern Ukraine. I appreciate the relentless efforts of my colleagues here in the House, including House Foreign Affairs Chairman Ed Royce and Reps. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) and Eliot Engel (D-NY), to ensure Ukraine has the defense articles, services and training and intelligence information needed to defend its territory and maintain its sovereignty.  I truly believe an independent, democratic Ukraine enhances the security of the United States and offers greater economic opportunity for citizens in both countries.”
Some of the key points of the legislation are:

“It is the policy of the United States to further assist the Government of Ukraine in restoring its sovereignty and territorial integrity to deter the Government of the Russian Federation from further destabilizing and invading Ukraine and other independent countries in Central and Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia.

“That policy shall be carried into effect, among other things, through a comprehensive effort, in coordination with allies and partners of the United States where appropriate, that includes economic sanctions, diplomacy, assistance for the people of Ukraine, and the provision of military capabilities to the Government of Ukraine that will enhance the ability of that Government to defend itself and to restore its sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of unlawful actions by the Government of the Russian Federation.”

“The President is authorized to provide defense articles, defense services, and training to the Government of Ukraine for the purpose of countering offensive weapons and reestablishing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, including anti-tank and anti-armor weapons, crew weapons and ammunition, counter-artillery radars to identify and target artillery batteries, fire control, range finder, and optical and guidance and control equipment, tactical troop-operated surveillance drones, and secure command and communications equipment.”

“There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of State $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2015, $125,000,000 for fiscal year 2016, and $125,000,000 for fiscal year 2017 to carry out activities under this section.”

“The President shall instruct the United States permanent representative or executive director, as the case may be, to the relevant United Nations voluntary agencies, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, and other appropriate international organizations, to use the voice and vote of the United States to support appropriate assistance for internally displaced persons in Ukraine.”

“The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Energy, and the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development are authorized to provide assistance in support of, and to invest in short-term solutions for, enabling Ukraine to secure the energy safety of the people of Ukraine during 2014 and 2015.

“The Secretary of State and the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development shall, directly or through nongovernmental or international organizations, such as the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the National Endowment for Democracy, and related organizations— strengthen the organizational and operational capacity of democratic civil society in Ukraine; support the efforts of independent media outlets to broadcast, distribute, and share information in all regions of Ukraine.”

“Congress makes the following findings: The Russian Federation is in violation of its obligations under the Treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, signed at Washington December 8, 1987, and entered into force June 1, 1988 (commonly referred to as the ‘Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty’ or ‘INF Treaty’). This behavior poses a threat to the United States, its deployed forces, and its allies. SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that— the President should hold the Russian Federation accountable for being in violation of its obligations under the INF Treaty; and the President should demand the Russian Federation completely and verifiably eliminate the military systems that constitute the violation of its obligations under the INF Treaty.”

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) noted: “The US Senate stands shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with the Ukrainian government and its people against the aggression of Vladimir Putin who continues to upend the international order. Meaningful assistance for the Ukrainian people is one step closer now to becoming a reality. This legislation sends a very direct message to President Putin who must change his calculus in Ukraine and abandon this disruptive path.  The territorial integrity of Ukraine must be restored and President Putin must understand that his destabilizing actions have serious and profound consequences for his country.”

The much needed success of pro-Ukrainian legislation at the US Congress was cheered by countless in Ukraine. “It’s hard to stop the flow of thoughts regarding victory in the USA… and thanks to thousands of people, who worked for the result,” Hanna Hopko, head of Committee on Foreign Affairs in Verkhovna Rada, wrote on her Facebook.

Sen. Richard Durbin said that the Ukraine Freedom Support Act is aimed at imposing additional sanctions on Russia and curbing Russian interference.

“This legislation builds on the sanctions President Obama has issued against Russia and sends a clear message to Vladimir Putin and his allies. The United States and Ukraine have built a strong friendship and this measure would curb Russian interference as Ukraine continues to chart its own course,” the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation quoted Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) as saying today. “The forcible seizure of sovereign territory at Russian gunpoint has no place in today's world and violates long-established international norms. That Putin thinks such aggression will help lift the aspirations and talents of the Russian people is an insult to them and the world.”

“It’s critical we continue to increase pressure on Mr. Putin while deterring future Russian aggression in Ukraine,” said Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ).  “The people of Ukraine have suffered for too long at the hands of pro-Russian separatists, who continue to threaten stability and security in the region.  This legislation is an important step towards reaffirming the United States’ commitment to helping the people of Ukraine defend themselves and preserve their territorial integrity.”
The Russians, obviously, despised the legislation and its supporters. As a matter of fact, just as with any American action in defense of Ukraine’s independence, Ukrainian political prisoners, or today’s independent development, Moscow was livid.

“The Ukraine Freedom Support Act adopted by both houses of the US Congress without debate and proper voting cannot but produce deep regret by its overtly confrontational contents,” the Russian Foreign Ministry’s spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said in the comment.

“Once again Washington is presenting unfounded, sweeping accusations and is threatening us with new sanctions,” he said, adding that “Russia will not yield to blackmail from the United States, will not sacrifice national interests and will not allow interference into internal affairs.”

Now it’s up to President Obama, who had urged Congress not to pass the legislation. Speaking at the White House Export Council on Thursday, Obama said the legislation would be counterproductive and create divisions with Washington's European allies. He is not yet convinced that Ukraine needs military hardware and that the US should provide it.

In deciding this point, President Obama should also take into consideration America’s security and global stability if Ukraine were to be lost to Russia on his watch. What would be the balance of power if Russia re-subjugates Ukraine and soon thereafter the other former captive nations, restores the iron curtain and the prison of nations, and installs nuclear weapons across the Russian empire and its colonies from the Caucasus, to Crimea, Poland and the Baltic Sea?

A word to the wise, Mr. President, sign the Ukraine Freedom Support Act when it arrives on your desk. You can be sure that Ukrainian Americans will be telephoning, faxing, emailing, blogging, posting and tweeting their opinion that you should sign it in a momentous ceremony of Ukraine-USA partnership.

Needless Ministry Sends Wrong Message

The establishment of the Ukrainian Ministry of Information is akin to President Poroshenko and Prime Minister Yatseniuk shooting themselves in their feet.

Without exaggerating, Ukraine has enjoyed the support and sympathy of most of the world for decades. Today, thanks to Russia’s merciless invasion and war, Ukraine has been experiencing unprecedented support and sympathy among powerful global leaders, national legislatures and everyday citizens. The world has accepted that Russia is the imperial aggressor and invader and Ukraine the victim.

Consequently, there was no reason to establish a Ministry of Information which harkens to dictatorships’ desire to control everything that is written, broadcast and imagined about them. This plan doesn’t work the way it was intended to – never has and never will. Ministries of information quickly deteriorate to misinformation and mind control.

I am a press and journalist purist – “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Exceptions can be made in times of national security but they must be adequately discussed, precisely explained, boundaries specified, duration established and termination indicated.

Ukraine’s ministry was adopted quickly, reportedly without details and debate, on December 2 as the government’s response to the avalanche of Russian propaganda that attempts to portray Ukraine as the perpetrator of the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014. I daresay that everyone around the world – except Russians and their diehard supporters who are in the miniscule minority of public opinion – know that Russia invaded Ukraine.

Press perfectionists immediately compared the ministry with George Orwell’s Ministry of Truth, which in the novel was a misnomer since in reality it served the opposite of its purported namesake: it was responsible for all necessary falsifications of historical events – into which ultimately evolve all similar ministries.

Yuriy Stets, 38, a former lawmaker of the Poroshenko Bloc, who worked as chief producer at Channel 5, owned by Poroshenko, was named minister of information. According to articles in Ukrainian media, he is considered to be the president’s close ally. The fast promotion of Stets as a new minister signaled that the president strongly pushed this idea and his selection sadly confirms that cronyism still exists at the highest echelons of government.

Stets assured that the new ministry is no threat, clarifying that it will only respond to foreign information attacks by creating country’s information strategy and assist communication among state bodies. Does that mean that it will form news outlets beyond the existing “official” newspapers and the National State Radio and Television Co.?

According to Oksana Grytsenko of the Kyiv Post, Stets said the ministry was going to use budget funds only for salaries of its staff and hopes to rely on foreign donors or grant money for other expenses, which he already did working as a chief of the information department of the National Guard. I don’t think that foreign donors, especially democratic ones, would consider contributing to such a ministry.

Stets claimed he needed the new ministry because while serving in the National Guard he didn’t have enough authority to resist Russian information aggression. “Every day at schools in newly liberated territories (of eastern Ukraine) we are being called junta at schools,” he said. Why not just explain to the children? If a guardsman can’t, then a ministry in Kyiv won’t be able to do so as well.

Stets said he was ready to review the ministry’s regulations, but he couldn’t delay creation of this ministry as loss of time would mean more losses in the information war. The final approval of regulations of new ministry should be complete in the next few days, he said. 

Stets said every ministry could potentially pose risks for journalists’ ability to disseminate public information. “This ministry will no way try to impose censorship or restrict freedom of speech,” he assured. Don’t promise what may be difficult to deliver.

Grytsenko’s article also pointed out that the ministry is going to “develop and implement professional standards in media sphere,” “ensure freedom of speech” and it should also prevent harm caused to people by “incomplete, outdated or unreal information.”  

Ukrainian media and civil society joined the uproar against the ministry. An appeal signed by 10 Ukrainian journalists and distributed by “Civil Portal” – civic.org stated:

“We, the representatives of institutions involved in communication with the international audience, express our protest against the idea of creating a Ministry of Information, which was announced last week.

“Our experience with international (particularly Western) journalists, diplomats, politicians, intellectuals and officials, decision makers, shows great suspicion that our foreign partners have about Ukraine’s attempts to conduct its own ‘counter-propaganda.’ Any attempt to centrally sway public information sphere is seen by our Western partners as competing with Russia in the field of propaganda by spreading false or one-sided information. And because such attempts immediately undermine confidence in the Ukrainian information sources and to Ukraine in general. This, in turn, impairs attempts to build a new image of Ukraine as a democratic and investment favorable country where the government creates an environment for free players, rather than seeking to control these players.

“We believe that the creation of the Ministry of Information is contrary to the ideals of the Revolution of Dignity. If the Dignity Revolution sought people’s oversight of state institutions, the idea of creating a Ministry Information bears the risk of state control over society in the information sector.”

The Independent Media Trade Union criticized the establishment of the ministry saying that it is undemocratic to establish a ministry first and afterward discuss the reasoning for it.

Reporters Without Borders condemned the creation of the ministry saying that it would be a major setback for freedom of information.

“We urge parliamentarians to reject this bill on second reading, as it is incompatible with the government’s obligations to protect freedoms. International conventions ratified by Ukraine stress that any restrictions on media activity must, under all circumstances, be necessary and proportionate,” said Johann Bihr, the head of the Reporters Without Borders Eastern Europe and Central Asia desk.

The only truth in the desire to establish a Ministry of Information in Ukraine is the massive mendacious Russian propaganda machine that has been spewing lies and fabrications about Ukraine (and other Russia detractors) since before the start of the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014. But the untruths have only fallen on the minds of complacent Russians, who blindly endorse everything that Putin is doing.

Putin is attempting to have media portray him in favorable colors. To do that, he has been destroying media freedom in Russia. The Kremlin has enacted numerous media laws under Putin that criminalize libel (which has been used as a pretext to silence opposition journalists and civil society), restrict access, and otherwise curtail media freedoms. The remaining Russian journalists with integrity have been targeted with violence and even murder.

Russian journalists, newspapers and broadcasters have discredited themselves by obeying Putin’s instructions. With journalist badges on their shoulders, they have been known to pick up automatic weapons and shoot at Ukrainian soldiers and civilians rather than take notes for their so-called stories.

And the world is well aware of this.

“As part of its drive to undo the post-Cold War settlement, Russia has launched a global media campaign to vindicate its actions in Ukraine. It is based on the Kremlin’s narrative of victimhood, in which the West takes advantage of Russia’s weakness following the implosion of the Soviet Union. These arguments, however, are deeply flawed. Moreover, Russian international media do not abide by Western journalistic ethics and standards. The West, therefore, has to systematically refute this storyline and hold Russian media accountable when they transgress the prevailing norms of due accuracy and due impartiality, or give undue prominence to certain standpoints,” observed Patrick Nopens in an Edgemont Institute series on current events.

Two more examples:

“Disseminating propaganda and misinformation through media is a crucial component of Russia’s integration of soft power and hard power tools, enabling Russia to apply greater force against its adversaries. The U.S. should take robust steps to counter Russian propaganda and to safeguard Western security and the transatlantic alliance,” opined Daniel Kochis, a Research Assistant in the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, at The Heritage Foundation.

Finally, US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt observed this past October: “Our best weapon in dealing with this, in answering this campaign of misdirection, of course, is the truth.”

Indeed. We, in the United States, have a concept called the “sunshine laws,” which means that no lie can live forever, causing harm, destruction and death with impunity. Lies will wither when confronted with truth and free media is the sunshine that wilts lies.

Ukrainian news media together with reliable journalists from around the world have been doing a fantastic job reporting about the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014, the Russian invasion Crimea and eastern Ukraine, the Russian destruction of Indonesian flight MH-17 killing nearly 300 civilians, the Russian murder by starvation of millions of Ukrainians, and so on.

The war has been going on for some nine months and throughout that period, as I have written, there has been a resolute shining light of truthfulness, facts and integrity in explaining and reporting the war: Col. Andriy Lysenko, spokesman for the National Security and Defense Council Information Center. He is professional and credible right down to the dispassionate tone of his voice. Does he toe the government’s line, yes. That’s his job. But he doesn’t embellish or lie. His evenhanded glare could vaporize Russian lies in a second. Give him more exposure rather than create a dubious bureaucratic machine whose historic mission has been to mislead.

As in all cases related to press and news media, but especially now, when Russian lies are rampant and the world’s eyes are upon Russia and Ukraine, the best weapons to fight Russian pernicious propaganda and falsehoods are truth, honesty and transparency, not by trying to beat Russia at its own game.

Finally, Ukraine has a New, Complete Leadership

In the midst of a tumultuous year, filled with instability, political upheavals and revolution, intrigue, treason, treachery, political and national rebirth, national consolidation, corruption, killings, two elections, brutal occupation of Ukrainian lands, a new government and a savage Russian war, the Ukrainian nation still has been making significant strides toward democracy, political stability, reinforcing its sovereignty and severing its chains with Russia.

And that should be the takeaway of the past 12 months.

Notwithstanding pundits’ premature, unfair grumblings and warnings about the revolution’s failure because of the erratic pace of transformations, the Ukrainian nation and its leaders understand clearly the dire consequences of defeat.

First, it would surely mean satisfying Putin’s goal of re-subjugating Ukraine in the Russian prison of nations. It would mean the return of corruption, dictatorship, russification, de-nationalization and economic stagnation. These reasons are enough to keep everyone’s – or almost everyone’s – eyes focused on that target and overcoming all obstacles.

The presidential elections in May brought to power a nationally aware, business oriented, pro-NATO and EU president. The parliamentary elections in October assembled deputies, the majority of who have the same profile. Political parties in favor of closer links to the EU and NATO won an absolute victory in the Verkhovna Rada, handing President Petro Poroshenko a mandate to end the domestic and external conflict and steer the Ukraine away from Russia’s orbit toward Europe.

In the past few months, Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatseniuk have demonstrated single mindedness in policies and ideas and the ability to lead the country without divisive, public squabbles. This mature conduct at the pinnacle of government authority is exactly what the nation needs at a time of war with Russia and domestic instability. Any sign of discord will be exacerbated by Ukraine’s internal and external enemies that are stage-managed by Russia.

Last week, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine resumed its constitutionally mandated deliberations and the first item on the agenda was the selection and adoption of a new government. Western media took note of the pervasive pomp, ceremony and expressions of unity that characterized the first day’s session.

More than two-thirds of the 450 legislators voted for Yatseniuk to remain as head of government, a post he has held since the Maidan Revolution ousted Viktor Yanukovych. Yatseniuk raised his hand to the president and declared to cheers: “Here is my hand for carrying out all that you have just said from this tribune. This is our joint responsibility,” he added before striding over to Poroshenko and warmly embracing him.

Regardless if it was staged or sincere, Ukrainian leaders are honor bound to display unity and steadfast dedication to the cause of strengthening the nation, subduing Russia, rooting out corruption and cronyism, and leading Ukraine toward acceptance by the EU.

The president and prime minister have unprecedented backing beyond the nation. The five-party coalition is expected be the most stable and powerful pro-western administration Ukraine has had in 23 years of independence, enjoying a two-thirds majority in parliament.

Poroshenko outlined a strong reformist agenda during the inaugural parliamentary session, calling for the immediate overhaul of a justice system that he decried as corrupted from the top down. He warned that the justice system’s corruption and deficiencies posed a national security risk.

“It is quite clear that the primary reason for the low standard of life of the majority of Ukrainians is the totally corrupted government apparatus,” he was quoted as saying.

He further said a successful reform program would enable Ukraine to consider applying for European Union membership within five years. With a doubt, European affiliation would give Ukraine a major economic and political shot in the arm. Even the preparation phase ahead of acceptance will benefit officials and people.

Poroshenko said Ukraine is enjoying a unique chance thanks to the responsible Ukrainian people to fulfill what he called a simple formula: “to avert the threat and use the chance.”

Emphasizing his intention to maintain amicable relations with parliament, Poroshenko said: “I am a reliable ally of the parliament in the implementation of reformatory, pro-European coalition agreement. I will be guided by the Constitution of Ukraine, which clearly, or relatively clearly, distributes powers and responsibilities. I will do everything possible for the coordinated work of Verkhovna Rada, the President and the Cabinet of Ministers.”

That is the measurement of success passionately and unequivocally demanded by the Ukrainian people.

“Our policy must be aimed at gradual movement from the country of the Revolution of Dignity to the Country of Dignity itself. I want you to remember those who sacrificed their lives for Ukraine every time you enter this hall. It is also related to me when I enter the administration on Bankova Street. You must remember those who died hundreds of kilometers away and those who died a few blocks away from here, on the Heavenly Hundred's alley. You must also remember those who are alive and need efficient governance, successful reforms, developed economy, social guarantees and justice,” Poroshenko appealed.

Yatseniuk, the 40-year-old bureaucrat from Vinnytsia, said the new government should work to pull the country back from the brink of collapse. Indeed, he has been doing a good job leading the government through hellfire and brimstone.

“On our shoulders rests the weight of historical responsibility -- to preserve the state and win our independence,” Yatseniuk told lawmakers ahead of the vote, adding, “Ukraine is at war, people are in trouble and it depends on us to stop the aggression.”

“We have faced external aggression, namely a Russian military invasion, which is nothing else than an encroachment on the territorial integrity of Ukraine and our independence. It is an attempt to destroy Ukraine. They can fight with our army and, probably, they can defeat it, but they can never defeat the Ukrainian people and the Ukrainian nation,” he said.
Yatseniuk tasked the members of the Cabinet of Ministers with developing an Action Program, which will include their top three priorities for 2015 and how to implement them. He outlined his vision in hands-on terms:

“Every minister has full authority in the ministry as well as full responsibility. You are selecting your deputies, as well as managers. The parliament demands of me, I demand of you. And the Ukrainian people demand of us.

“On our further work. We will hold a special cabinet meeting on the Action Program of the Government of Ukraine. This program must meet the key goals and objectives, I emphasize once again, there are five of them.

“The first issue, national security and defense.

“The second issue, economy, reform of the tax system and reform of the single social tax.

“The third, the fight against corruption.

“The fourth, energy. We need to complete the reform of the energy system of Ukraine, most of all I worry about the deficit of the National Joint Stock Company Naftogaz Ukrainy, which exceeds the state budget deficit. While the public deficit is now UAH 68 billion, the deficit of Naftogaz UAH makes up UAH103 billion.

“And the last issue on the agenda is public administration reform.

“These five key tasks have to be in the Action Program of the Government and, dear friends, we have not time to ‘warm up,’ we only have time for specific actions as well as the results of these actions.”

• To these goals, I’d add for the record:
• Defeat, subdue and expel Russia from Ukraine.
• Complete EU accession requirements.
• Bring to justice in Ukraine all criminals, traitors and Maidan killers who fled the country.
• Formally designate Ukraine’s geopolitical alignment.
• Give oblasts, cities and local municipalities authority similar to America.

Poroshenko’s plan to appoint Ukrainians from the diaspora to serve in the government was approved. He granted citizenship to Georgia-born Aleksandr Kvitashvili to serve as health minister, US-national Natalie Jaresko, who hails from Chicago, to be finance minister, and Lithuanian Aivaras Abromavicius to serve as economics minister.

“There are absolutely extraordinary challenges facing Ukraine – an extremely difficult economic situation, Russian aggression, the need for radical reform and the fight against corruption. All this requires innovative solutions in the government,” Poroshenko explained, hopefully adding that not having been associated with Ukraine’s life may have excluded them from the country’s old-boy network.

Speaking of the law on the National Anti-corruption Bureau that will soon enter into force, Poroshenko also offered to appoint a foreign person as head of the given bureau. “This person will have one advantage – absence of ties in the Ukrainian political elite,” he noted.

On a very practical level, parliament and the cabinet are tasked with holding together a collapsing economy.

“Ukraine is in a vicious financial crisis. Threatened constantly by Russian military aggression, the country faces a financial meltdown within the next four months,” economist Anders Aslund observed in a column last week. “At the end of October, its international reserves fell to $12.6 billion, below the threshold considered critical for solvency. The hryvnia exchange rate is falling exponentially. As a consequence, most of Ukraine’s banks are collapsing. The public debt is skyrocketing and is likely to double to about 80% of GDP this year. Inflation is set to rise to 24% this year and then surge further.”

However, the new parliament will not be a lovefest. The strongest opposition to the pro-EU majority’s plans will come from discredited allies of Yanukovych and ex-members of his disgraced Regions Party, which dominated Ukrainian politics until the revolution. His former supporters heaped all the blame for the uprising and its bloody conclusion on the protesters and ousted president personally, and reconvened in a new party called Opposition Bloc.

Among newly elected leaders of the Verkhovna Rada is Volodymyr Hroysman who was elected speaker. A Jew by heritage, Hroysman, 36, is considered the third-most important post in the country after the prime minister and president, and is the first to stand in for the president if the head of state is unable to fulfill his duties. He was previously mayor of the central city of Vinnytsia and joined the government in February 2014 as deputy prime minister for regional policy. His appointed is noteworthy in the wake of Russian accusations of Ukrainian anti-Semitism.

Parliament endorsed Pavlo Klimkin to remain as foreign minister. His contributions in that capacity since the spring have been in line with nation’s view of Ukraine’s national, pro-EU & NATO vector. Colonel-General Stepan Poltorak was endorsed as defense minister. He became commander of the Ukrainian National Guard on March 19, 2014, and previously he was commander of the Ukrainian Interior Ministry's Interior Troops for the period between February 28, 2014 and March 12, 2014. He also served as superintendent of the Interior Minister Academy in Kharkiv.

An airborne officer from Lviv, however, in an email to me cautioned that Poltorak, 49, belongs to the old-boy network of technocrats, bureaucrats, diplomats and career military officers, stemming from the days when he was a captain. This fraternity does not shy away from graft and favoritism.

“It is sad that key posts are still awarded on the basis of personal loyalty rather than professional ability,” he said.

Two of the nation’s demands of their new leadership, beyond national awareness, pro-NATO and EU, and distancing Ukraine from Russia, have been political unity in the hallowed halls of government, and an end to cronyism and corruption, and transparency. Cronyism, especially, is a sin that the new officials of new Ukraine must avoid.  

Maidan ousted Yanukovych in February and sought to sweep away the corrupt and treasonous political elite. However, Ukraine’s new leaders are still viewed with suspicion by millions of compatriots who brought them to power but still question their appetite for radical change.

Fortunately there are parliamentarians who seem to be ready and willing to remind officials regularly of the people’s skepticism. Among them is Volodymyr Parasiuk, known as “sotnyk” during Maidan, one of its heroes who publicly threatened Yanukovych to leave Kyiv or else. In His Facebook post last week, he said:

“I will never let anybody besmirch the illustrious glory of Maidan. For this is the basis of our struggle and only the power, given to us at the cost of the lives by our heroes, that makes our nation move forward.

“Volodymyr Hroysman will either be a normal head of parliament or he’ll go away. Because the demand of every Ukrainian is transparency and fairness in adopting any decision. If you want to run the state – run it; want to assume responsibility for it, assume it. But you will do it correctly and not how you want to do it,” he said.

Parasiuk added that he came to the Verkhovna Rada to “break the system and I will do it any way possible and accessible for a deputy.
In a guest column in The Wall Street Journal on December 5, Poroshenko wrote: “On the external front, we are united in fighting for our freedom and for our future as an independent nation—a fight that has implications for all of Europe and global security. Domestically, the new government’s attack on inefficiency and corruption will further bind Ukrainians together. The Gospel teaches us that a kingdom divided against itself cannot stand. We won’t give this chance to the enemy. Day by day, Ukrainians are unifying as citizens, as governors and as Europeans.”

Ukrainian soldiers and civilians have been doing their share for Ukraine. They have been expressing their will, fighting, dying and giving their mandates. Now it’s time for the three branches of government to stand up and do their share without excuses and explanations.

Ukraine Freedom Support Act Introduced

A companion bill to S.2828, the Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, was introduced on Tuesday, December 3, in the House of Representatives with 10 co-sponsors (bipartisan), according to the Ukrainian National Information Service (UNIS) in Washington, DC.  HR5782 was introduced by Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), co-chair of the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus, and supported by the following original co-sponsors:

Rep. Sander Levin (D-MI), co-chair of the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus

Rep. Jim Gerlach, co-chair of the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus

Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ)

Rep. James Moran (D-VA)

Rep. William Keating (D-MA)

Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY)

Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-NJ)

Rep. Gerald Connolly (D-VA)

Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX)

Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL)

“Please contact your Member of Congress to support this bill. Time is of the essence as Congress is in session for one more week,” urged Michael Sawkiw Jr., UNIS director.

With Ukraine facing a major war that was launched against it by predatory Russia, successful passage of this bill will help President Poroshenko, Prime Minister Yatseniuk and the Ukrainian armed forces, National Guard and volunteer battalions to wage a successful counteroffensive against Russia, subdue its advances and expel it from Ukraine.

The support of all Ukrainian Americans is essential.

A Word to the Wise …

In the eight months since the start of the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014, the international community has reluctantly recognized Russia’s aggressive nature as well as its historical manifest destiny to subjugate Ukraine and the other former captive nations and restore the glory of “holy mother Russia.”

World leaders and national lawmakers have condemned Russia for invading Ukraine and occupying Crimea and eastern regions of Ukraine. The United States, Canada and European Union have instituted economic sanctions against Russia.

These comprehensive sanctions and rapidly declining oil prices have visibly hurt Russia, forcing it to issue a plea to the EU to lift sanctions in exchange for waiving counter measures but not exiting from Ukraine.

Despite daily evidence of Russia’s military escalation against Ukraine, military excursions around the world, and east European fear of Moscow’s aggression, western leaders are not taking their demands and threats against Moscow to the next level that would hopefully expel Russia from Luhansk, Donetsk and Crimea. Their trepidation-laced procrastination, inactivity and rhetoric are only exacerbating the political and diplomatic situation and increasing civilian and military deaths.

The free world – and that geopolitical description has returned to relevancy today – is confounded about what to do next. Should it station more troops near Ukraine? Should it proclaim Russia an international terrorist state and expel it from global events? Should it provide Ukraine with military armament or lethal arms so it can protect itself and subdue Russian invaders?

Among several outspoken legislators, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) is resolutely in Ukraine’s corner.  In an interview last week that appeared in Euronews.com, McCain urged the White House to demonstrate global leadership and stand up to Putin’s belligerence and invasion of Ukraine.

“In other words we have to have a robust policy to give the lesson, one, to Vladimir Putin that he can’t just move across Europe,” McCain said. “I said that if we didn’t stand up to Vladimir Putin and help the Ukrainians that he would move further south and consolidate his control over eastern Ukraine.”

The Arizona senator said Russia seized Crimea, solidified its positions in eastern Ukraine, moved more tanks and equipment into Ukraine, and slaughtered more than 4,000 Ukrainian soldiers.

“Are you worried about provoking Vladimir Putin? Are you crazy? Look what he’s doing? He is winning. He is, for the first time since the end of WWII a country is being dismembered in Europe and we won’t give them weapons to defend themselves. My, my! Listen those 300,000 people I saw in Maidan in sub-freezing weather, they don’t want to be part of Russia, they don’t want to see their country dismembered as is happening today and they deserve our help, by providing them with weapons. I mean, to think that we shouldn’t, and worry about provoking Vladimir Putin….”

Despite his pugnacious observations, McCain doesn’t believe that they would provoke a hot war with Russia.

“I know of no scenario where that would happen. But wouldn’t it be nice if these people who are having their homeland invaded to have some weapons with which to defend themselves.” he suggested.” I would like to see the Europeans, particularly through NATO, provide the Ukrainians with weapons with which to defend themselves from Russian aggression. He’s now got control of eastern Ukraine. In recent days he’s moved more tanks and equipment into Ukraine and he’s going to take Mariopul, so he has a land bridge to Crimea. Then he will be contemplating what kind of price he has to pay to move over to Moldova.”

Canada, among other US allies, is similarly on board with verbal and practical support. Its Defense Minister Rob Nicholson has called on Russia to get out of Ukraine, saying that what’s happening there is “completely unacceptable.” Ottawa is providing Ukrainian troops with millions of dollars of aid, including winter wear.

US military commanders comprehend the renewed global threat posed by Russia. General Philip Breedlove, four-star US Air Force general who serves as commander, US European Command, as well as the 17th Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO Allied Command Operations, has been warning of Russia adventurism since before the start of the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014.

Breedlove believes that US and NATO must enhance their military presence in Europe because of Russia’s belligerence.

“Because of the increased pressure that we feel in Eastern Europe now, and because of the assurance measures that we are taking in the Baltics, in Poland and in Romania, we require additional rotational presence. What we are doing is working with the Army and other services to use their regionally aligned forces to get them forward, to get their experience forward, to bring that capability to interact with our partners and allies,” he said.

Breedlove told Department of Defense News that among the challenges faced by the European military command is a revanchist Russia.

Noting the recent uptick in Russian air incursions over Europe, Breedlove said, “What is significant is that across history, most of these incursions have been very small groups of airplanes, sometimes singletons or at most, two aircraft. What you saw this past week was a larger, more complex formation of aircraft carrying out a little deeper -- and I would say a little bit more provocative -- flight path.”

He criticized the Ukraine-Russia border as being wide open and completely porous with “Russian equipment, resupply, training flows back and forth freely across that interborder space.”

Breedlove earlier this month strongly warned that Russia is seeking to militarize Crimea. He said Moscow’s actions are forcing the West to beef up its military capabilities, and it is discussing plans to put aircraft in Ukraine’s Crimea region that have a full range of capabilities, including possibly tactical nuclear weapons.

“Hybrid war is what we are coming to call what Russia has done clearly in Crimea and in eastern Ukraine,” Breedlove indicated, saying that Moscow has brought military, political and economic pressure on Ukraine, eroding the border and shifting it toward a line of demarcation further west. “I’m concerned that the conditions are there that could create a frozen conflict,” one that creates a new reality.

A frozen conflict would be devastating for Ukraine, potentially mirroring the one that exists in the Middle East with random urban terrorist attacks, bombing and drive-by shootings taking countless innocent lives from Luhansk to Lviv.

Breedlove, speaking later in the Bulgarian capital of Sofia, said: “What worries me the most is that we have a situation now that the former international border between Ukraine and Russia is completely porous, it is completely wide open.”

He added: “Forces, money, support, supplies, weapons are flowing back and forth across this border completely at will and that is not a good situation.”

“Across the last two days we have seen the same thing that OSCE is reporting. We have seen columns of Russian equipment – primarily Russian tanks, Russian artillery, Russian air defense systems and Russian combat troops – entering into Ukraine,” Breedlove said. "I am concerned about the increased movement."

During his all-important visit to Ukraine last week, when he met with President Poroshenko and other top officials, Breedlove emphasized the strategic importance of Crimea, saying at a press conference: “We are very concerned with the militarization of Crimea. The capabilities that are being installed in Crimea will bring an effect on almost the entire Black Sea.”

He said cruise and surface-to-air missiles on the peninsula, which Russia seized from Ukraine in March, could be used to “exert influence” over the strategic region.

Russian militarization of Crimea and the Black Sea region will pose definite, amplified problems for Turkey, Greece, the European Union, NATO as well as Ukraine and destabilize the region. Polish news media took note of Breedlove’s comments about Russia’s militarization of Crimea, saying that it could lead to Moscow’s expansion throughout the eastern European and Black Sea region.

While in Ukraine, Breedlove made his boldest warning, saying that Russia has enough troops along Ukraine’s border to mount a major incursion and Moscow is using its military might to affect political developments inside Ukraine. He said a large number of Russian troops are active inside Ukraine, training and advising separatist rebels.

“We are going to help Ukraine’s military to increase its capacities and capabilities through interaction with US and European command,” Breedlove said, adding that it “will make them ever more interoperable with our forces.”

Another high-ranking military professional, Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling (ret.), who commanded the 1st Armored Division and US Army Europe before retiring in 2013, has advocated more aid for Ukraine. He said in a recent interview with Army Times:

“My military background has taught me that those who adapt during conflict the fastest, tend to survive. Ukraine is adapting, and fast. Faster than they have in the past.

“They are no longer talking about gradual change, eradication of corruption, elimination of the old guard, budget reform, and military transformation. They have developed plans to do all these things, and they have a group of young mavericks who are smart and up to the task of leading and acting. War and the specter of potential destruction provide a passion and energized focus that quickly overcomes inertia.

“We must help them. Vice President Biden also visited Ukraine in November, and while he likely did not give Ukraine all the support they need, I sincerely hope he has offered more support in a variety of areas. The U.S. needs to continue actively supporting Ukraine, even as we are faced with other crisis.

“We must expand economic sanctions against Russia. We must find new ways to counter the information campaign Mr. Putin is waging. We must influence NATO and EU nations to make the continued hard choices that show Mr. Putin we stand united in not allowing this attack on a sovereign nation to stand. And, we must increase our training, advising, and assisting Ukraine's military in the face of bold aggression.”

Indeed, one aggressive response by NATO could be a new fast-reaction force, considered the centerpiece of its response to Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Unfortunately, it is proving harder to set up than expected because of shortages of vital equipment and arguments over funding. NATO leaders meeting in Wales in September agreed on a new “spearhead” force of up to 5,000 ground troops with air, sea and special forces support as part of a plan to reassure eastern European allies nervous about Russia’s actions in Ukraine. NATO leaders envisioned a force able to quickly reinforce eastern Europe in case of trouble. Some units would be ready to move in two days, compared with the five needed by NATO’s current response force.

“We’ve found that standing up that capability has more difficulty involved than perhaps the alliance expected when it took the decision at Wales,” Britain’s ambassador to NATO, Adam Thomson, was quoted as saying. “We have moved so far away from the capabilities that the alliance developed for collective defense through the Cold War.”

Faced with the prospect of having to defend themselves, Lithuania, Ukraine and Poland are planning a joint brigade that will provide an opportunity for Ukraine to learn from Lithuania’s and Poland’s experience of NATO integration and to develop efficient armed forces.

The plan grew out of a meeting between Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite and Poroshenko. Grybauskaite, a staunch supporter of Ukraine, announced that Lithuania would be providing Ukraine with military aid, but did not specify if this would include weaponry or be of the non-lethal kind.
Contrast these calls for aid for Ukraine with knee-jerk appeals for Ukraine to settle the crisis with Russia expressed last week.

John Thornhill in the Financial Times wrote that Ukraine and west must offer Russia a deal to end the war. Nikolas Kozloff opined in Huffington Post that Ukrainians should reconsider their Cossack (sic) pride in dealing with Russia. Samuel Charap said in Foreign Policy that it’s high time for Ukraine to bargain for peace with Russia. European Council President Herman Van Rompuy suggested the solution to the conflict in Ukraine can be the federalization and decentralization of the country. 

All of these are examples of panic talk by officials and pundits who do not have any creative ideas in their minds except not wanting to embarrass Russia by forcing it to concede defeat in Ukraine.

The onus of a solution must not be placed on Ukraine, which did not invade Russia. Ukraine is the victim not only of this Russian invasion but of nearly 400 years of Russian occupation, persecution and russification.

The free world must force Russia to admit its flawed scheme, withdraw its army from Ukraine, cease aiding its mercenaries and pay reparations. The free world must support Ukraine at all levels to accomplish this, including increasing sanctions at a time when the Russian economy is tumbling every day.

However, NATO boots on the ground is not a viable option because it would be dangerous especially if a Russian regular soldier or mercenary were to shoot and kill an American soldier. The ramifications would be too difficult to imagine.

It would be unjust if Ukraine were to be forced to compromise. Once and for all, the free world must muster all of its political and moral strength, and loudly, in unison confront Putin for his aggression and stare him down to submission.

A popular contemporary rhetorical question asks what would happen if the free world were to step up its support for Ukraine and opposition to Russia? A more practical question would be is what would happen to the free world if Ukraine and the other former captive nations were re-subjugated by Moscow? Which way would the balance of power pendulum then swing?

Russia’s crimes have been exposed for everyone to see and a word to the wise about the scope of support for Ukraine should suffice.

Maidan: 12 Months that Shook the World

Twelve months ago, the sudden, dramatic turnaround by Viktor Yanukovych and his lackeys in government and the Verkhovna Rada about Ukraine’s accession to the European Union Agreement, orchestrated by the Kremlin, has gone down in history as a most fateful decision that destroyed peace, stability and security in Europe.

On the other hand, the subsequent popular, national Maidan revolution, blazoned with abundant flags of Ukraine, EU, NATO and OUN, opened a new chapter for Ukrainians and genuinely liberated Ukraine from Russia’s prison of nations.

In the course of a year, traitors were uncovered, a new generation of heroes was anointed, the first Lenin monument in Kyiv crashed to the ground on December 8, 2013, followed by hundreds more across Ukraine, Yanukovych and his henchmen fled Kyiv on February 22, 2014, Putin launched the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014 on February 28, 2014, and Russia bared its imperialistic nature. World leaders and pundits consequently began to understand what generations of Ukrainians and other former captive nations have been saying about innate Russian aggression.

What began on November 21, 2013, as a massive national demonstration on the streets of Kyiv against Yanukovych’s decision, known as Maidan, evolved into a national revolution that despite Russian instigated violence and killings managed to oust Russia’s governor in Ukraine and his supporters. It also cemented the Ukrainian nation’s yearning to become a part of Europe and break the chains that have bonded it to Russia for nearly four centuries.

The events associated with that day will be inscribed in the history of Ukraine along with other manifestations of national will, self-determination, independence and sovereignty:

January 22, 1918 – declaration of independence of Ukraine;

November 1, 1918 – declaration of independence of Western Ukraine;

January 22, 1919 – proclamation of unity of Ukraine;

March 15, 1939 – declaration of independence of Carpatho-Ukraine;

June 30, 1041 – declaration restoring independence of Ukraine;

August 24, 1991 – the ultimate declaration of independence of Ukraine.

To commemorate this day and its heroes, President Poroshenko is expected to sign Decrees on Annual Commemoration of the Day of Dignity and Freedom on November 21 and the Day of Unity of Ukraine on January 22.

“Ukraine is the territory of dignity and freedom originated from two revolutions – our Maidan of 2004, which was the Holiday of Freedom, and the Revolution of 2013, the Revolution of Dignity. It was an extremely difficult challenge for Ukraine, when Ukrainians demonstrated their Europeanness, dignity and desire for freedom. As President of Ukraine, I must documentarily attest it and sign the Decree on the Day of Dignity and Freedom that will be celebrated by Ukrainians on November 21 from here to eternity,” Poroshenko explained why the dates would be officially recognized.

In time for the anniversary of Maidan, Civicua.org, called Prostir, a Ukrainian NGO dedicated to fostering Ukrainian national and democratic values, released the results of a national survey about Maidan – or Euromaidan as it is also called to emphasize the linkage between Europe and Ukraine – that confirmed the national scope of the revolution.

The survey found that some 20% of the population actively participated in the revolution on the streets of Kyiv or their hometowns. With Ukraine’s population at 45.3 million, that means there were 9.6 million revolutionaries. They were supported with goods, services and funds by 9% of the population.

Those figures by themselves are a testimony to the widespread desire of Ukrainians to change their status and fulfill their sovereign aspirations.

RFE/RL related a heartwarming story about Maryna Sochenko of Kyiv, who told the radio’s correspondent that her sketchbook was permanently at her side on Maidan from the first day. The radio report continued that a year later, Sochenko flips quickly through an endless pile of canvasses and drawings in her studio as she marks the first anniversary of the protests with an exhibition of her portraits of the faces of Maidan.

“There were so many different types of people,” she observed. “The most interesting thing is the geography, of course. I didn’t go looking for people. They came to find me. This one is from Sevastopol. This one from Kherson. Here is a journalist from Kyiv. All of Ukraine is here.”

Prostir reported that the largest group of protesters, according to the survey Fund Democratic Initiatives of Ilko Kucheriv and the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, were western Ukrainians. Of them, 7% participated in protests in Kyiv and 26% in other cities and villages. About one-third of them helped the protesters. In the Central Kyiv region, 9.5% of the people participated in the revolution and 2% in other urban and rural areas, while 7.5% helped protesters.

At that time, Ukrainian community organizations, trade unions, municipal agencies and small businesses chartered buses, trains and other forms of transportation for their people to join the revolution.

Of the demonstrators, 25% had higher education; 15% – special secondary schools; 14% completed secondary 14%; and 7%  – middle school. All age groups were represented in the protests from teenagers to senior citizens, the survey showed.

In analyzing what Euromaidan meant for them, the demonstrators’ prevailing opinion (38%) was that it was a “conscious struggle of citizens coming together to protect their rights,” another 17% believe that the protests were spontaneous. One third of the respondents regarded Euromaidan as a coup against the Russian-controlled Yanukovych regime, 16% thought it was prepared by the political opposition, and 15% felt it was sponsored by the West.

Of those who took part in protests in Kyiv, 76% said they would vote in a referendum for Ukraine’s accession to NATO, and among those who took part in protests outside Kyiv, supporters rose to 90%.

Another revealing characteristic of the Euromaidan revolution was that it was a rebellion against Yanukovych and his cabal and Russia staged by all Ukrainians – Ukrainian and Russian-speaking Ukrainians, as well as Catholics, Orthodox, Jews and others.

Regardless how you analyze the numbers, Euromaidan was a national revolution for a better Ukraine, one that would be a member of Europe, and one that would shed its shackles to Russia.

Srdja Popvic and Slobodan Djinovic, in their article “Remember What They Died for on the Maidan” in the November 3 edition of Foreign Policy, observed:

“Western governments have failed to reinforce the message that though democracy may not be a perfect system, it is still better and fairer than any other system civilization has ever discovered. Do not forget that it was the Ukrainians, not Germans, French, or Brits, who put their lives on the line and died by the hundreds this spring on the Maidan under the banners of the European Union. They gave their lives for these values. Are we going to let their sacrifice be in vain?”

Support for Maidan is not universal. As can be expected, Russia detests Maidan as much as it detests the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), democracy, free press and human rights. Its news outlet “RT” vindictively commented that Maidan signaled the start of Ukraine’s destruction.

Indeed, we – those who participated, survived, witnessed it or watched the web streams – can’t let Maidan’s sacrifice be in vain no more than we can let the sacrifices of their predecessors who fought for Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and indivisibility be in vain.

Proclamations, monuments, gravestones, stamps and memorials are visible examples of eternal memorials. A greater impact will be made if the memory of Maidan inspires and lives perpetually in the hearts and souls of Ukrainians everywhere.

See Prostir’s website for a slideshow about Maidan: http://www.slideshare.net/ProstirUA/ss-41804556

Notable Quotes from G20

I was opposed to Vladimir Putin’s presence at the G20 summit in Australia because imperialists, warmongers, invaders and global bullies should not associate with democratic leaders of the free world. I still am against Putin’s participation in any global event but fortunately, at the G20, the encounters turned out better than expected due to the indignation of the most ardent supporters of Ukraine and opponents of Russia’s invasion and bullying of Ukraine and the world.

The public tongue lashing that Putin endured kept Ukraine and historical Russian imperialism in the forefront of global events, newspapers and pundits. Here is a collection of some of the memorable quotes:

“Well I guess I’ll shake your hand, but I only have one thing to say to you: you need to get out of Ukraine.”

Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada

“I am very frank when I meet with him [Putin] that the things that Russia has done in Ukraine are unacceptable.”

“Russia is being much more assertive now than it has been for a very long time. Interestingly, Russia’s economy is declining even as Russia’s assertiveness is increasing.”

“Russian action in Ukraine is unacceptable. We have to be clear about what we are dealing with. It is a large state bullying a smaller state in Europe. We have seen the consequences of that in the past and we should learn the lessons of history and make sure we don't let it happen again.”

“If Russia takes a positive approach toward Ukraine’s freedom and responsibility, we could see those sanctions removed, if Russia continues to make matters worse then we could see those sanctions increased, it’s as simple as that.”

“It’s important to warn of the dangers if Russia continues to head in the other direction.”

“There’s a real choice here, there’s a different and better way for Russia to behave that could lead to an easing of relations, but at the moment he’s not taking that path.”

“If that path continues and if that destabilization gets worse, the rest of the world, Europe, America, Britain, will have no choice but to take further action in terms of sanctions.”

“I would still hope that the Russians will see sense and recognize that they should allow Ukraine to develop as an independent and free country, free to make its choices.”

“There is a more incipient, creeping threat to our values that I want to mention. It comes from those who say that [traditional Western democracies] will be out-competed and outgunned by countries that believe there is a shortcut to success—a new model of authoritarian capitalism that is unencumbered by the values and restrictions that we place upon ourselves. We should have the confidence to reject this view and stay true to our values.”

“If he continues to destabilize Ukraine, there’ll be further sanctions, further measures, and there will be a completely different relationship between European countries and America on the one hand, and Russia on the other.”

David Cameron, Prime Minister of Great Britain

“I am going to be saying to Mr. Putin: Australians were murdered. They were murdered by Russian-backed rebels using Russian-supplied equipment. We are very unhappy about this.”

“Let’s not forget that Russia has been much more militarily assertive in recent times. We’re seeing, regrettably, a great deal of Russian assertiveness right now in Ukraine.”

“Russia would be so much more attractive if it was aspiring to be a superpower for peace and freedom and prosperity, instead of trying to recreate the lost glories of tsarism or the old Soviet Union.”

“There is a heavy responsibility on Russia to come clean and atone” adding that Moscow’s bullying of Kiev was part of a “regrettable pattern” that included the stationing of a naval fleet in the South Pacific.

Tony Abbott, Prime Minister of Australia

“We are also very firm on the need to uphold core international principles. And one of those principles is that you don't invade other countries or finance proxies and support them in ways that break up a country that has mechanisms for democratic elections.”

“At this point the sanctions we have in place are biting plenty good. We retain the capability, and we have our teams constantly looking at mechanisms in which to turn up additional pressure as necessary.”

The United States was at the forefront of “opposing Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, which is a threat to the world, as we saw in the appalling shoot-down of MH17.”

“What is concerning me quite more is that the territorial integrity of Ukraine is being violated and that the agreement of Minsk is not followed.”

“If he continues down the path that he is on -- violating international law; providing heavy arms to the separatists in Ukraine; violating an agreement that he agreed to just a few weeks ago, the Minsk Agreement, that would have lowered the temperature and the killing in the disputed areas and make providing us a pathway for a diplomatic resolution – then the isolation that Russia is currently experiencing will continue.”

Barack Obama, President of the USA

We oppose “Russia's purported annexation of Crimea and its actions to destabilize eastern Ukraine,” and were committed to “bringing to justice those responsible for the downing of Flight MH17.”

President Barack Obama, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott

“It’s clear that these geopolitical tensions, including relations with Russia, are not really conducive to promoting growth. We are all striving to do everything diplomatically possible to see improvements.”

Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany

“Russia has still the opportunity to fulfil its Minsk commitments to choose the path of de-escalation, which could allow sanctions to be rolled back. If it does not, however, we are ready to consider additional actions. We will continue to use all the diplomatic tools, including sanctions, at our disposal … the EU foreign ministers will on Monday assess the situation on the ground and discuss possible further steps.”

Herman van Rompuy, President of the European Union

“The current situation is not sustainable for world peace and the economy.”

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

“(Putin) won’t stop at Ukraine, he wants to re-form the Soviet Union. He is an evil man, a murderer not welcome in Australia.’’

Irene Stawiski, Ukrainian Australian, part of group that staged an anti-Putin protest, wearing headbands reading “Putin, Killer.”

“While Ukraine has not sought ‘boots on the ground’ from the West, it does deserve the material support of G20 leaders who are recognizing that it is the place where the major threat to international peace and prosperity is most apparent. As a buffer to Putin, it does deserve greater political and economic engagement, where countries like Australia can continue its leadership.

“Ukraine’s fight is the world’s fight – and the world needs to invest in defending itself from Putin’s neo-imperial ambitions and aggression.”

Stefan Romaniw, President of Australian Federation of Ukrainian Organizations

Putin replied coldly and aloofly as the KGB taught him that he cannot withdraw from Ukraine because Russia is not in Ukraine. The conflict in Ukraine is an internal one. Russia is not an aggressor. So far, world leaders have rejected Putin’s lies but, oddly, accepted him.

Despite these visible, undiplomatic but welcome expressions of condemnation, the photo-ops of the G20 showed a different picture. In reality, there were strong words, handshakes and smiles. Putin and Abbott even glowed while posing together with koalas in their arms. I guess these cuddly animals could melt animosity, Russian imperialism and gross violations of international order. USA Today picked up on this point in a story headlined “Good Cheer Masks Ukraine Tension at G-20 Summit.”

“Throughout the day, summit participants exuded good cheer and camaraderie. Despite Australia having lobbied for Vladimir Putin to be dis-invited, the Russian leader was greeted warmly. He chatted amiably with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and exchanged pleasantries with Abbott,” the newspaper wrote.

We can only hope that the words of censure, pressure to withdraw from Ukraine, threats of more sanctions and indignation will survive beyond the good cheer and smiles displayed in the photos.