Ukraine: The Kitty Genovese of Today’s Global Neighborhood

The international community’s reaction to what is happening to Ukraine is incomprehensible. World leaders – the usual motley group of North American, European and Asia ones – have been incapable of doing anything to stop Russia from continuing to ravage Ukraine for the sake of its imperial expansion and to protect Ukraine from Russia’s bloody military advances.

How can this be taking place in the 21st century? Hasn’t anyone read history? Isn’t the conclusion obvious?

As I think about my own questions, my thoughts drift to an event that had its place in the borough of Queens in New York City 51 years ago. A young woman was killed in full view of her neighbors who actually witnessed from the comfort of their high-rise apartment windows what was happening and couldn’t or wouldn’t do anything to stop the assailant or protect the unfortunate woman.

Here is an excerpt from Martin Gansberg’s article in The New York Times of March 27, 1964.

For more than half an hour 38 respectable, law-abiding citizens in Queens watched a killer stalk and stab a woman in three separate attacks in Kew Gardens.

Twice their chatter and the sudden glow of their bedroom lights interrupted him and frightened him off. Each time he returned, sought her out, and stabbed her again. Not one person telephoned the police during the assault; one witness called after the woman was dead…

Twenty-eight-year-old Catherine Genovese, who was called Kitty by almost everyone in the neighborhood, was returning home from her job as manager of a bar in Hollis…

The entrance to the apartment is in the rear of the building because the front is rented to retail stores. At night the quiet neighborhood is shrouded in the slumbering darkness that marks most residential areas.

Miss Genovese noticed a man at the far end of the lot, near a seven-story apartment house at 82-40 Austin Street. She halted. Then, nervously, she headed up Austin Street toward Lefferts Boulevard, where there is a call box to the 102nd Police Precinct in nearby Richmond Hill.

She got as far as a street light in front of a bookstore before the man grabbed her. She screamed. Lights went on in the 10-story apartment house at 82-67 Austin Street, which faces the bookstore. Windows slid open and voices punctuated the early-morning stillness.

Miss Genovese screamed: “Oh, my God, he stabbed me! Please help me! Please help me!”…

The assailant stabbed her again.

“I'm dying!” she shrieked. “I’m dying!”…

Gansberg concluded his article by writing: “It was 4:25 A.M. when the ambulance arrived to take the body of Miss Genovese. It drove off. “Then,” a solemn police detective said, “the people came out.”

Kitty’s neighbors offered a variety of excuses why they allowed her to be killed in their voyeuristic presence.

“I didn’t want to get involved.”

“We thought it was a lovers’ quarrel.”

“I didn't want my husband to get involved.”

“We went to the window to see what was happening … but the light from our bedroom made it difficult to see the street … I put out the light and we were able to see better.” Asked why they didn’t call the police, the wife shrugged and replied: “I don't know.”

“I was tired."

“I went back to bed."

On a personal level, the murder of Kitty Genovese and the callous disregard for her life by her neighbors was devastating and inhuman.

On a national level, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the indiscriminate killing of Ukrainian civilians and soldiers along with the callous disregard for what is happening there by countries near and far is also devastating and inhuman. The UN says more than 6,000 civilians have died because of Russia’s war with Ukraine.

On a global scale, thanks to all sorts of technological advances, Russia’s undeclared war against Ukraine is being witnessed by the same callous, immovable, unconcerned, indifferent neighbors who witnessed Kitty’s murder five decades ago. Their apathetic explanations are identical to those who saw Kitty killed in cold blood.

While Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was undeclared and unexpected, the subsequent occupation of Crimea and Donbas, and Moscow’s advances westward did not occur without some sort of spy in the sky warnings. Especially in the past several weeks Ukrainian and NATO military and political sources have been daily cautioning that Russia is amassing tens of thousands of soldiers on its border with Ukraine in preparation for a significant escalation of hostilities. Do something before it’s too late, they plead.

Moscow’s occupation of Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk has also scared the other Eastern European former captive nations into reviewing its defense capabilities and seeking military help from NATO.

Last month Viktor Muzhenko, Ukraine’s army chief of staff, listed for the first time some of the specific Russian military units fighting in Ukraine alongside Moscow’s terrorists in eastern Ukraine.

“Regular Russian army troops are still in Ukraine,” Muzhenko said for all the world to hear. “We have details of all the Russian units, where they are deployed, their numbers and their weapons.”

Muzhenko named among them the Russian army’s 15th Mechanized Infantry Brigade, the 8th Mechanized Infantry Brigade, the 331st Airborne Regiment and the 98th Airborne Division.

Just like murdered Russian journalist Boris Nemtsov, the Ukrainian official said Kyiv has proof that Russian regular troops had fought in three clashes in the east in February, including a fierce battle for the railroad town of Debaltseve, which is now controlled by Russian mercenaries.

Russian-backed militants have dramatically also increased their activity in the Donbas conflict zone, head of the Information Resistance group and military blogger Dmytro Tymchuk wrote on his Facebook page. According to Tymchuk, the militants fired artillery and 120mm mortars, and tried to attack the Ukrainian units, including using armored vehicles. A sharp growth of militant activity has been recorded in the Luhansk, Donetsk and in coastal areas, he said.

The Russian terrorists in the Donbas region in early April were to have almost 700 tanks and 1,100 armored combat vehicles, according to the report of deputy commander of the ATO Valentyn Fedichev from the information center of the Donetsk regional military and civil administration in Kramatorsk, reported Express TV.

“According to the Minsk agreements, the 9,000 servicemen of the Russian regular armed forces must leave the occupied territories of Donetsk and Luhansk regions, and all military equipment that has been illegally transferred by Russia to the territory of a sovereign state, and this is almost 700 tanks, more than 1,100 armored combat vehicles, nearly 600 artillery systems, more than 380 MLRS and 110 air defense systems, must be withdrawn," Fedichev said.

They didn’t while, according to him, on April 7, 40 items of military equipment, including 10 tanks, arrived in Luhansk. On April 6, two companies of Russian troops arrived in the area of Debaltseve in Donetsk region.

"In [Russia’s] Rostov region training is being conducted on combat operations performance in the city. More than 1,500 troops of the special forces of the Russian Federation Armed Forces are involved in the exercises," Fedichev said.
US military sources have corroborated Ukrainian’s justified fears.

Retired Gen. Wesley Clark, former head of US and NATO forces in Europe, warned at an exclusive briefing with the Atlantic Council that a renewed Russian offensive in Ukraine was imminent and would most probably take place between Orthodox Easter on April 12 and Russia’s celebrations of VE Day on May 8. While both dates have come and gone, Russia’s escalation is still held at bay for reasons which may be simple as the army isn’t ready to attack.

“Ukrainian forces expect attack within the next sixty days,” Clark recently wrote for the Atlantic Council. “This assessment is based on geographic imperatives, the ongoing pattern of Russian activity, and an analysis of Russian actions, statements, and Putin’s psychology to date.”

Clark was joined by the top US commander for NATO who urged that America needs better intelligence on the ground in Ukraine, and added that it appears Russian forces have used a recent lull in fighting to reposition for another offensive.

Gen. Philip Breedlove, commander of NATO forces in Europe, told the Senate Armed Services Committee, who has expressed concern about Russia’s aggression, said the situation in Ukraine is volatile and fragile and urged Congress to bolster U.S. intelligence capabilities to better understand Putin’s intent in the region.

“Russian military operations over the past year in Ukraine, and the region more broadly, have underscored that there are critical gaps in our collection and analysis,” Breedlove said. “Some Russian military exercises have caught us by surprise and our textured feel for Russian involvement on the ground in Ukraine has been quite limited.”

This movement of invaders is obviously directed by Russians, Breedlove assured. “We do see a very distinct Russian set of command and control in the eastern part of Ukraine,” he said. "Command-and-control, air defense, support to artillery, all of these things increased ... making a more coherent, organized force out of the separatists.”

In one 48-hour period in April, as Ukrainian forces faced 20 attacks by Russian-led militants and spotted 30 enemy drones probing their positions, the Frankurter Allgemeine Zeitung quoted an unnamed NATO official saying that Russia has sent additional military manpower and arms to Donbas.

“We have noticed again support for the separatists, with weapons, troops and training. Russia is still sending troops and arms from one side of the open border with Ukraine to the other,” the NATO official told the German news publication.

The press center of Ukraine’s Anti-Terrorist Operation headquarters has been regularly reporting that Russian-backed militants have been violating the terms of the Minsk agreement, attacking Ukrainian forces with weapons they were supposed to have withdrawn from the front line. Russia began violating the truce before the ink dried on the agreements.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg reported a sizeable Russian military buildup on the border with Ukraine that he said would enable pro-Moscow separatists to launch a new offensive with little warning. Stoltenberg said Russia has substantially stepped up supplies to the rebels, as well as providing them with advanced training and equipment like drones, despite a cease-fire.

Stoltenberg said the Russian moves undermine the cease-fire declared in eastern Ukraine and violate the Minsk agreements entered into by Moscow. He said more than 1,000 pieces of Russian military equipment have been moved over the past month, including tanks, artillery and air defense units.

Stoltenberg said this “gives reason for great concern” and would enable the separatists to go on the offensive again with little warning.

The list of officials exposing Russia’s impending military escalation against Ukraine includes John Herbst, a former US ambassador to Ukraine. He said recent military moves by Russia show that President Putin's “minimal goal is to destabilize the current government” in Ukraine. The maximum goal would probably be to re-subjugate the former captive nations.

Herbst, who now directs the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council, a Washington think tank, said from Kyiv that “Putin is ramping up pressure on Ukraine by adding troops on the eastern border and in Crimea and by increasing the violations across the ceasefire line and in order to do that, he can’t simply sit behind the ceasefire line.  He needs to move forward to cause additional instability in the country.”

Ukraine has repeatedly urged its neighbors and allies to send it weapons and accused rebels of persistent ceasefire violations as NATO warned about an increase in Russian troop movement both near and across the border.

“The Ukrainian army needs weapons to defend Ukraine,” Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk told parliamentarians. “And our western partners must hear: Now the Ukrainian army is struggling not just for itself, but we are fighting for peace and stability in the EU.”

But Ukraine’s nearest neighbors have turned a deaf ear. EU leaders have told Ukraine they are worried about ceasefire violations in the east of the country but will not send armed peacekeepers there. “We can only talk about a civilian mission, not military,” European Council President Donald Tusk said.

President Obama, at a joint press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzō Abe in Washington, demonstrated understanding the global threat posed by Russia’s belligerence.  Obama said the acts of Russian aggression against Ukraine are a threat to the world that must be confronted in a global context,

“We oppose the Russian aggression against Ukraine, provide assistance to civilians under threat of the Islamic State extremist group, fight against the Ebola virus and promote global health, and now we’re offering assistance to the people of Nepal,” Obama said.
Despite these words and as increased Russian fighting on the ground in eastern Ukraine continues to claim innocent lives and disrupt regional peace and stability, members of the U.S. Congress once again are pressing Obama to request lethal military aid for Ukraine to combat Russian-backed rebels. The president already has ignored a resolution urging lethal US aid for Ukraine that the House passed by 348 to 48 votes. Consequently, the US President joins the neighbors who pulled down the window shades as the knife plunged into the innocent passerby.

“There is no doubt that it is important to provide humanitarian assistance to the population that is affected by the fighting. However, this aid only treats the symptoms of a larger problem,” read the statement by Reps. Michael Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Sander Levin (D-MI), and Marcy Kaptur (D-OH). “The Ukrainian government is in dire need of defensive weapons, which are necessary to protect its borders and sovereignty.”

Pro-Russian separatists appear to be making preparations for a fresh offensive in eastern Ukraine, US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter told lawmakers. “It does appear that clearly, Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine are preparing for another round of military action that would be inconsistent with the Minsk agreement,” Carter told the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee.

Ukrainian President Poroshenko said the threat of a large-scale offensive from the side of Russian-backed militants has been growing, and the strength of the enemy’s troops is estimated at 40,000 men, while another 50,000 servicemen are deployed along the border with Ukraine.

Even with this imminent threat, Poroshenko said that Ukrainians ready to defend country and that the morale of the Ukrainian armed forces is currently at its best, as has been the case in recent history.

“We keep getting more evidence and information proving that the aggressor will commence a military offensive in the second half of May. I don’t want to frighten anyone, and you should know that the country is capable of protecting its citizens,” he said.

Poroshenko emphasized that the war will be over when Donbas and Crimea are returned to Ukraine. Nothing more, nothing less. That is the line in the sand, which must be recognized by friends and foes.

In the meantime, Ukrainian servicemen step up the pace of digging trenches on a beach in the port city of Mariupol, about eight miles from Shyrokyne, on the Azov Sea, where the next Russian onslaught is anticipated.

The global neighborhood must consider what will be its steps when they hear: “Oh, my God, he stabbed me! Please help me! Please help me!”… “I'm dying!”

Ukraine’s Laudable Nuclear Policy & Russia’s Attempt to Kill NPT

Without overstating the case, in two dozen years since declaring its independence from Soviet Russian captivity, Ukraine has managed to create an enviable national nuclear culture worthy of emulation by countries that have nuclear weapons, those that don’t and those who would like to construct these weapons of mass destruction.

As a captive nation, without sovereign rights, in 1991 Ukraine found itself in possession of the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal, consisting of 176 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) launchers with some 1,240 warheads on its territory. 

Rather than using these extremely deadly weapons as bargaining chips to blackmail Washington, Moscow or other capitals or even sell to any fanatical terrorist organization, Ukraine did the unthinkable by giving them away. On May 13, 1994, the United States and Ukraine signed a Memorandum of Understanding on the Transfer of Missile Equipment and Technology.

But surrendering Ukraine’s nuclear stockpile did have one prerequisite. The free world and Russia agreed to guarantee Ukraine’s territorial integrity in a document that was known as the Budapest Memorandum.

Ukraine’s foresightedness created a precedent that could have paved the way for the realization of mankind’s dream of genuine global peace, stability and security. Countries large and small could have been convinced to follow Ukraine’s path and stop dreaming of their own nuclear stockpiles. But Russia’s penchant for aggression and imperial adventurism was not to be contained and it launched a war against its former captive nation, invaded Ukraine, and seized Crimea and two eastern oblasts of Donetsk and Luhansk. After 15 months the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-15 has not abated and upwards of 6,000 civilians have lost their lives at the hands of Russian soldiers and mercenary terrorists.

Imagine if Ukraine had not voluntarily surrendered its nuclear weapons. Would Russia have had the temerity to attack its nuclear power neighbor? Was depriving Ukraine of nuclear weapons part of Russia’s long-term plan to restore the iron curtain and its prison of nations?

Foreign Minister of Ukraine Pavlo Klimkin was at the United Nations on Thursday, April 29, where he eloquently assured the global community of Ukraine’s unwavering belief in the practical value of the Treaty of the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) but cautioned that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine not only threatens the effectiveness of that document but simultaneously global peace, security and stability. Klimkin called on the international community to support Ukraine’s efforts to expel Russia from Ukraine for the good of future generations.

“Ukraine has always been the country with an exceptional role within the Non-proliferation Treaty.

“We started from voluntary refusal from the nuclear weapons in 1994. We passed through gradual elimination of nuclear arsenal inherited from the Soviet Union during all the following years. Finally we have eliminated highly enriched uranium by 2012. With this background Ukraine should have become the model state of the NPT regime.

“Ukraine's nuclear-free success story could become an example to follow. This success could contribute greatly into strengthening of the NPT regime.

“But all those efforts were brought to naught by the Russian aggression against Ukraine,” Klimkin said at the NPT Review Conference at the UN.

However, he said, Russia’s war with Ukraine has threatened global peace and fosters nuclear proliferation. The explicit and implied assurances embedded in the Budapest Memorandum, which he bemoaned were never legalized, were to send a message to all countries hoping to acquire nuclear weapons that there is another option embodied in a sovereign, democratic and prosperous Ukraine integrated in the European and Euro-Atlantic structures and living in peace with its neighbors.

“That positive picture, that message and our vision of global security have been crushed almost overnight by the Russian aggression against Ukraine and its occupation of Crimea,” he said. “The Budapest Memorandum has been blatantly discarded by the country which pledged to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine.”

Klimkin explained correctly that some countries and their governments could see that Russia’s occupation of a part of Ukrainian territory and a de facto military aggression by Russia against Ukraine as evidence that international legal instruments are insufficient to ensure territorial integrity and inviolability of state borders. Consequently, they could resolve to develop their own nuclear weapons program in defense against a real or perceived enemy.

This is a “tremendous challenge” to the international nuclear security system based on the NPT, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and the IAEA, he said.

Klimkin noted that Russia’s aggression against Ukraine has given rise to voices within Ukraine to resume production of nuclear weapons “as the only means to protect ourselves from any outside aggression.”

“But from the Ukrainian government’s standpoint, this option is not on the table. Hereby we confirm that Ukraine considers the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as a cornerstone of the global non-proliferation regime and an essential basis for achieving the objectives of nuclear disarmament,” Klimkin vowed.

As a result of Russia’s war against Ukraine, the foreign minister said, within a year Moscow has turned the Crimean peninsula from a flourishing seaside resort into an economically depressed region with a modern military base ready for the deployment of nuclear weapons.

“The violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity by Russia impedes the implementation of the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. Russia seized Ukraine’s nuclear facilities, installations and materials located on the temporarily occupied Ukraine’s Crimea, in particular the Sevastopol National University of Nuclear Energy and Industry, in contradiction to the Agency Statute.

“Russian-backed militants and Russian regular troops made life of industrial Donbas region of Ukraine a nightmare. Since Minsk agreement was reached we witness constant violations of the ceasefire by the Russian-backed militants in the East of Ukraine. In such situation Ukraine is deeply concerned over the nuclear safety of the facilities located in the temporarily occupied territories of Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine.

“In this respect, we are looking forward to prompt restoration of Ukrainian control in these regions in accordance with Minsk agreements,” Klimkin said in the hallowed halls of the United Nations.

Klimkin recalled the 70th anniversary of the nuclear destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki this year, adding that Ukraine is suffering “from aggression by nuclear state Russia. I would also like to use this forum to invoke Russia to stop aggression and liberate Ukrainian territories, illegally occupied throughout 2014.”

Klimkin places sole hope on preserving the global nuclear security system squarely on the international community, which “must recognize that Ukraine is the starting point indicating whether NPT regime is or is not capable to stop proliferation of nuclear weapons. Until territorial integrity of Ukraine is restored and the Crimea is liberated we cannot discuss ‘business as usual’ within the NPT.

“We strongly believe that those challenges should find their rightful reflection in the final document of this Conference wherein the UN General Assembly Resolution ‘Territorial Integrity of Ukraine’ is fully considered,” he said.

The basis of nuclear disarmament and security is building confidence in countries sharing borders with nuclear powers that their weapons and the intention to use them will remain under lock and key. With its war against Ukraine, Russia has shattered the confidence not only of Ukraine but of all former captive nations that are consequently quickly rebuilding their conventional military strength to withstand Russia’s aggression against them.

In order to return the global community of independent states to a shared course toward peace, stability and security, the international community, NATO and the UN must join with Ukraine in forcing the expulsion of Russia from Ukraine. Russia’s secure seat on the UN Security Council must also be questioned. Anything short of that will contribute to rising tensions, instability, comprehensive rearmament and militarization, and continuing global armed conflagrations.

Russia Offers Ukraine Surrender Terms – Nuts!

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, in what was carelessly disregarded by the news media and politicos as a mundane statement, last week offered Kyiv Russia’s terms for surrender after 15 months of waging an undeclared war in eastern Ukraine. Journalists, pundits and writers reported about Lavrov’s words but not their inherent meaning.

Lavrov demanded:

Ukraine’s neutrality

Ukraine must abandon unitary statehood

Ukraine must abandon Ukrainianization

While Lavrov didn’t directly state that these are Russia’s conditions for ending its hostilities toward Ukraine and Kyiv’s surrender, Russia’s clever and deceitful foreign minister said in an interview with the Russian radio station “Ekho Moskvy” these terms would keep his country and Ukraine on friendly terms. Interestingly, the point about Ukrainianization was overlooked by the mainstream media.

A website Joininfo.com quoted Lavrov as making the following stipulations:

“Ukraine can exist only as a state that recognizes the diversity of its constituent regions and constituent cultures.”

“In order to do that, they must abandon the obstinacy with regard to compulsory preservation of Ukraine’s unitarity, which is called for again by the President (Petro) Poroshenko, and ministers of the Ukrainian government. To abandon what they call Ukrainization.”

It was important “to preserve Ukraine neutral, primarily, in military and political sense.”

Apparently once Ukraine adheres to this provisions, it would be kept “united and friendly” with respect to both Russia and Europe.

Western news media covered Lavrov’s remarks but avoided mentioning Russia’s disdain for Ukrainianization, which is the essential backbone of Ukraine’s policy to exist as an independent, sovereign, indivisible state like others on earth. Lavrov seemed to contradict himself when he said Russia does not favor Ukraine’s dismemberment but, on the other hand, insisted that Ukraine abandon unitary statehood.

In his interview, Lavrov also warned the United States and NATO that they should not make Ukraine anti-Russian, which he claimed has been mainstay of their foreign policy.

These three demands were not proposed by a low-level Russian bureaucrat but rather by one of the highest ranking Russian government officials who enjoys Putin’s confidence. They cannot be considered mere banter but only for what they truly are: Russia’s conditions for Ukraine’s surrender – surrender in a war that it did not declare, surrender in a war in which its army did not cross state borders, surrender in a war in which the enemy invader is pushing westward almost daily, bombarding and seizing Ukrainian cities, killing and terrorizing civilians.

Russia’s demands are meant to weaken Ukraine, deny it of its ancestral Ukrainian heritage, and turn it into a nameless piece of real estate on the border with Russia. A weak Ukraine will help Russia pursue its messianic policy of restoring the glory of mother Russia. A weak Ukraine will endanger peace and stability in Europe and the free world.

Lavrov’s terms reiterated Russia’s national mission of destroying Ukraine, which stems from the sacking of Kyiv by Andrei Bogolyubsky in 1169 and then Tsar Alexander II’s infamous Ems Ukaz of 1876, which outlawed everything Ukrainian and paved the way for the inhumane policy of Russification. This gross interference in the sovereign behavior of an independent state and violation of Ukraine’s human rights by a foreign state must be deplored by the international community and the United Nations.

After centuries of Russian subjugation, Ukraine finally after declaring its independence on August 24, 1991, and especially since Petro Poroshenko was elected president has been struggling to freely reassert its ancient Ukrainian heritage and language. This is being accomplished without persecuting non-Ukrainian ethnic groups in Ukraine like Russia is doing with non-Russian ethnic groups in Russia. The current Ukrainian government and presidential administration is also striving to build Ukraine into a strong commercial and military country, confident in its ability to safeguard its citizens, share its wellbeing with foreign trading partners, and withstand enemies’ overt attempts to re-subjugate it.

As for Russia’s terms for Ukraine’s surrender, Kyiv must reject them and the free world must endorse Ukraine’s warranted position. Kyiv’s response should be public and memorable.

History buffs will recall Gen. Anthony Clement McAuliffe, who was acting division commander of the 101st Airborne Division defending Bastogne, Belgium, during World War II’s Battle of the Bulge. When he received Nazi Germany’s surrender ultimatum, he simply replied “Nuts!” This became a symbol of America’s determination and courage under fire.

Ukraine must devise its own historic reply that will inspire future generations of Ukrainians to be determined and courageous under fire.

Russian Barbarism: Executing POWs

Since the start of the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-15, news and social media have been filled an ample of amount of stories about Russian war crimes committed against the civilian population and soldiers. The destruction of MH-17 is perhaps the most blatant example of this.

The latest case pertains to documented evidence that Russian troops have been executing Ukrainian prisoners of war in clear violation of the Geneva Convention.

Article 13 of the convention regarding treatment of prisoners of war unmistakably declares:

“Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.

“Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity

“Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited.”

News of this shocking evidence was brought to light last week by Amnesty International. The global human rights nongovernmental organization, which viewed a video account, described the incidents as “execution-style” killings by what it called pro-Russian armed groups in Donbas.

“The new evidence of these summary killings confirms what we have suspected for a long time. The question now is: what are the separatist leaders going to do about it?” Denis Krivosheev, Europe and Central Asia Deputy Director at Amnesty International, said in a statement.

“The torture, ill-treatment and killing of captured, surrendered or wounded soldiers are war crimes. These claims must be promptly, thoroughly and impartially investigated, and the perpetrators prosecuted in fair trials by recognized authorities.”

Amnesty International favors use of “pro-Russian” but the murderers could just as easily have been Russian regular army commanders.

Footage reviewed by Amnesty International shows Ukrainian soldier Ihor Branovytsky, one of the defenders of Donetsk airport, taken captive and interrogated. The video, posted on YouTube, shows signs that he was hit in the face. He remained in captivity until he was killed. For their dedication to defending the airport, Ukrainian soldiers were nicknamed “cyborgs” – which has evolved into a modern-day badge of honor in Ukraine.

According to Amnesty International, several individuals claim to have seen Branovytsky being shot and killed point-blank by a separatist commander. His body was returned to his family earlier this month and he was buried in Kyiv on April 3. Ukrainian security services have opened an investigation into his killing.

Amnesty International has also confirmed seeing other videos documenting the captivity, and pictures of the dead bodies, of at least three other members of the Ukrainian armed forces, reportedly being held in a morgue in Donetsk. There are signs of bullet wounds to their heads and upper parts of their bodies, apparently the result of execution-style killings. The soldiers were captured by Russian forces in Debaltseve during February 12-18, when the defending Ukrainian forces were encircled there.

Amnesty International cited a report in the Ukrainian newspaper Kyiv Post on April 6, which published a phone interview, reportedly made with Arseniy Pavlov, better known by his nom-de-guerre “Motorola.” Pavlov, who claims to be a Russian national and the leader of the pro-Russian armed group known as “Sparta Battalion” operating in eastern Ukraine, claimed he had “shot dead” 15 soldiers captured from the Ukrainian armed forces. He is believed to have killed Ihor Branovytsky.

“This chilling ‘confession’ from a separatist fighter, alongside video evidence and testimony from witnesses, and the mounting evidence of abuses of captives by both sides, highlights the urgent need for an independent investigation into this and all other allegations of abuses in this conflict which began a year ago,” said Krivosheev.

Amnesty International said this type of behavior is tantamount to a war crime.

“Summary killings are a war crime, plain and simple. The leaders of the self-styled ‘Donetsk People’s Republic’ in eastern Ukraine must send their members a clear message: those who fight with them or on their behalf must respect the laws of war. They must urgently remove from their ranks anyone suspected of responsibility for ordering or committing serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights abuses, and fully cooperate with any independent investigation,” said Krivosheev.

Russian terrorists in Ukraine are holding at least 300 Ukrainian POWs, according to Ukrainian Defense Ministry spokesman Yuri Tandyt and it’s believed that some of them have been transported across the border to an uncertain fate into Russia.

Under the Minsk ceasefire accords, POWs and other detainees were to be returned to their national representatives.

The Associated Press, in fulfilling its journalistic obligation of presenting both sides of the issue, reported that Eduard Basurin, a spokesman for Russian mercenary terrorists, denied the claims, saying that footage of soldiers being taken prisoner could not serve as evidence. “Accusations without facts are nothing. Nobody has shot anybody," Basurin was quoted as saying.

Can you imagine a correspondent or news service during World War II, such as Edward R. Murrow, quoting a spokesman for the Nazis, the Gestapo or SS who denied Nazi war crimes and killing Jews en masse?

After World War II, Nazis were brought to trial in Nuremberg for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Ukraine and the free world must immediately begin preparations to bring Russians who committed war crimes in Ukraine – those who actually shot the POWs and those who gave the orders – to trial in The Hague. This issue cannot be swept under the diplomatic rug and the execution of Ukrainian POWs as well as the Holodomor should not be granted statutes of limitation for the sake of improving relations with Moscow. 

Putin Shamelessly Denies Russian Troops in Ukraine

Russian President Vladimir Putin, in his four-hour encounter on April 16 with journalists – if you can call Russians who write about current events journalists – continued to demonstrate without batting an eye or missing a beat his uncanny showmanship and skill of lying, fabricating, manipulating and twisting an event into something it never resembled.

While the 240-minute transcript offers a great deal of fodder for examination, analysis and reconstruction, I’d like to address one particular one, which deals with the pressing question of whether or not Russian soldiers have invaded Ukraine.

During this annual charade, Irina Khakamada, a Russian politician who ran in the Russian presidential election of 2004 and is a member of The Other Russia coalition, directly asked Putin about the presence of Russian soldiers in Ukraine.

Khakamada constructed her query in two parts with the first one dealing with the murder of Boris Nemtsov. Her interest in these two issues could lead some unfamiliar readers to presume that she is an opposition figure but in reality she’s probably in Putin’s camp with a license to pose visibly tough questions and even criticize the President of Russia.

The Ukrainian newspaper Day on May 13, 2014, pointed out that Khakamada irritated Ukrainians by calling Putin a winner “who carried out a special operation without a single fired shot, and said that Crimea has always needed Russian identification.”

Moderator Yekaterina Mironova called on Khakamada, noting that she is well known and she has a question about Ukraine.

She asked: “At Boris’ funeral, Western journalists approached me and said – this information is also available on the internet – that Boris Nemtsov had received certain information about the presence of Russian troops during the events in southeastern Ukraine. At the funeral, the Western journalists kept asking me the same question. Can you finally say, can you say it in so many words whether or not our troops have been there?”

Two curious points emerged in her questions. The first pertains to her use of the word “events” in southeastern Ukraine. This resembles some free world leaders’ timid refusal to call that event in Ukraine a war that was launched by Russia against Ukraine. The second point is her request to finally say “in so many words,” which means Putin can keep his reply brief.

And Putin obliged Khakamada, saying: “Finally, the question of whether Russian troops are present in Ukraine… I can tell you outright and unequivocally that there are no Russian troops in Ukraine.”

In 26 words he set the record straight and corrected numerous legitimate sources, including NATO and eye witnesses, who have testified that Russian soldiers are fighting side-by-side with Russian mercenaries from Russia, Chechnya, Asia and southeastern Ukraine in an undeclared war against Ukraine.

There were other questions about Ukraine in the meeting but no one dared to return to the question of Russian troops in Ukraine.

Khakamada’s first question about the murder of Nemtsov also elicited a cynical reply from Putin. She asked “what do you think about the way the investigation is moving along and is there a chance that we will learn who ordered this heinous murder, which is more reminiscent of a terrorist act?”

Putin’s reply was far longer than his remarks about Russia’s war with Ukraine but the point that related to her question asserted:

“I believe a killing of this kind is a shame and a tragedy.”

“The question of whether those behind the murder will be found remains open. Of course, we will find out in the course of the work that is currently being done.”

As for Putin’s denial about Russian troops in Ukraine, for the past 14 months news media have been filled with an abundance of documented reports of their incontrovertible presence in Ukraine. An interesting article filled with supporting photographs appeared on April 3 in Vice News (www.news.vice.com) with the headline “Russian Soldiers Have Given up Pretending They are Not Fighting in Ukraine.”

“For the past year, the Kremlin has strenuously denied that its troops are supporting pro-Russia rebels in eastern Ukraine — but fighters on the ground are apparently no longer bothering to keep up the farce,” wrote Alex Luhn. “St. Petersburg native Dmitry Sapozhnikov, who went to Ukraine in October to fight alongside the rebels, told the BBC Russian service in a candid interview from Donetsk that Russian military units have played a decisive role in rebel advances, including the operations in February that led to the capture of the transport hub of Debaltseve. Russian officers directly command large military operations in eastern Ukraine, he noted.”

Luhn also wrote: “Throughout the conflict, which the United Nations says has killed more than 6,000 people, evidence of Russian military support for the rebels has mounted.

“Ten Russian paratroopers were captured in Ukraine last August, and NATO published satellite photographs showing what it described as Russian tanks crossing the border that summer. Rebel leader Alexander Zakharchenko even admitted around the same time that active-duty Russian troops were fighting with his men, though he claimed that they had chosen to fight while on vacation.”

He also said: “Russian officials including President Vladimir Putin have repeatedly denied that their soldiers are in Ukraine, arguing that the Russians who are fighting there are all volunteers.

“Sapozhnikov himself is one such volunteer, a leader of a fringe monarchist party in St. Petersburg who said he left his business renovating homes to help defend Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine and oppose Kyiv’s shift toward the West. As the leader of a special forces unit of the Donetsk People’s Republic, he also took part in the bloody battle for the Donetsk airport, which the rebels captured in January after months of fighting.

“He admitted the Russian military has been instrumental to their success.”

The free world cannot overlook Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the involvement of its regular armed forces, tanks, aircraft and other military equipment in a war that is not about annexing southeastern Ukraine but re-subjugating all of Ukraine into Russia’s prison of nations.

Noteworthy Article on Nuclear Disarmament; Except …

I recently read a brief but noteworthy analysis of the understandable need for global nuclear disarmament.

The article presented readers with a comprehensible blend of often cited buzzwords, including global confidence building, peace, stability, non-proliferation, international security, nuclear test ban, human development and so forth as well as threats veiled as advice.

Written by a high-ranking governmental official, the treatise begins rather auspiciously by stating the obvious that “one of the most important tasks in the field of international security is to free the world from the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction.”

The writer, a distinguished diplomat in his own right, goes on to state that “Global stability and nuclear deterrence remain the facts that we have to live with. Without trust and consensus, the current challenges in the field of nuclear disarmament are doomed to persist for a foreseeable future. Hopefully, the time will come, sooner rather than later, when nuclear disarmament issues are properly addressed based on respect and trust among nations.”

Indeed, due to their monstrous proven and hypothetical dimensions of mass death and destruction, nuclear weapons unquestionably threaten the existence of Earth and the lives that inhabit it and consequently must be banned.

At a United Nations conference for non-governmental organizations on disarmament held in 2009 in Mexico City that I attended as a UN staff member, Miguel Marin Bosch, a Mexican diplomat, not the one who penned the words that I cited previously but who successfully fought for the establishment of a nuclear-free zone in Latin America in 1967, noted that the machete has been known for killing a vast number of people throughout history perhaps more than nuclear bombs but eloquently stated: “Nuclear weapons are intrinsically dangerous. They pose an unparalleled threat to the very existence of humankind. They do not enhance a country’s security but rather imperil the survival of all nations. That should be the point of departure of nuclear disarmament efforts.”

The impassioned nuclear disarmament debate has attracted in the course of seven decades ferocious supporters and opponents. Even today the governments of the evident nuclear powers, the US, Russia, England, France and China – Ukraine used to a member until it voluntarily surrendered its nuclear stockpile to Russia in exchange for the free world’s guarantee of its independence – are filled with officials firmly on one or the other side of the fence as well as those who straddle it. But supporting nuclear disarmament doesn’t mean pacifism and opposing nuclear disarmament doesn’t mean war mongering.

Fortunately, mankind hasn’t had to endure nuclear devastation since 1945.

However, as for the lofty aspirations enunciated in the cited passages above, they are entwined in one major hypocritical fault. They were expressed at the end of last month by Dr. Alexander Yakovenko, Russian ambassador to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and deputy foreign minister in 2005-11, in an article on the website of Russia’s broadcast propaganda mouthpiece Russia Today that is meant to indoctrinate the gullible about Moscow’s irreproachable decency.

Beyond theoretical anti-nuclear rhetoric, Yakovenko devoted a couple of sentences to listing imaginary Russian efforts at global confidence building in support of nuclear disarmament. He wrote:

“Russia is constantly advocating for further limitations and reductions of nuclear weapons stockpiles, along with strengthening international regimes of arms control and non-proliferation.”

In actuality, Russia has done nothing to live up to its advocacy for limiting and reducing nuclear weapons stockpiles. Modern Russia does not even match the defunct Soviet Union’s military policy. While the USSR claimed it would adhere to a no first use policy for nuclear weapons, modern Russia dropped that pledge. The revised Russian military doctrine of December 2014 foresees the use of tactical nuclear weapons in the case of a conventional attack that threatens the very existence of the Russian state. Given the strengthening of Russia’s paranoia and harangues regarding its own perceived encirclement by NATO as well as its full-blown war with Ukraine, today’s Russian historical “we will bury you” threats should not be regarded as bluffs.

As of September 2014, Russia had 1,643 strategic warheads deployed on 528 ICBMs, SLBMs, and strategic bombers. Russia’s defense budget has grown by more than 50% since 2007, and a third of it is devoted to nuclear weapons, according to The Economist.

Furthermore, the same source that published Yakovenko’s fiction, Russia Today, on October 6, 2014, revealed more evidence of Russia’s nuclear war preparedness:

“Russia recently announced a planned overhaul of its entire nuclear arsenal by 2020, as part of a wider rearmament program that has been budgeted at $700 billion.
“Although Moscow has not provided a detailed breakdown of how it achieved the upgrade of nuclear capacity over the past months, experts on both sides of the Atlantic have speculated that the rise has been due to the armament of one – or possibly two – Borei-class nuclear submarines.

“Those are equipped with Bulava missiles – widely considered one of the most expensive projects in Russia’s military history – which, after problem-plagued gestation, have finally been deemed ready for deployment…
“Russian President Vladimir Putin has recently boasted that the supersonic missiles, which can rapidly change their trajectory, cannot be shot down by any missile defense system in the world, however sophisticated.
“Russia has also invested in mobile Yars systems, and there are plans to revive the nuclear missile trains common in Soviet times. 

Yakovenko also wrote: “Among other things that affect global stability and deterrence, trust between Russia and the West is diminishing. Some of the critical Russian concerns are left unaddressed.”

Indeed, trust between the free world and Russia has finally begun to diminish thanks to imperialistic Russia’s undeclared war with Ukraine. In the course of the past 14 months Russia invaded Ukraine via Crimea then illegally annexed the peninsula. Then several weeks later again invaded Ukraine by way of the eastern oblasts and established its colonial administrations in Luhansk and Donetsk. After witnessing such wanton, unprovoked violence against a peaceful neighbor, it’s no wonder that the free world’s trust in the Kremlin is diminishing.

Since the beginning of the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-15, the news media has regularly quoted western experts and Russian officials about Russia’s escalation of its war with Ukraine and its blatant threat of using nuclear weapons to solidify its control over captured Ukrainian territory and push NATO back from the former captive nations.

Among what he called unaddressed concerns Yakovenko included “the Russian initiative on the prevention of the placement of weapons in outer space.”

The placement of nuclear weapons in outer space is hardly a serious option nowadays when Russia is in fact more interested in moving missile delivery systems to occupied Crimea and its borders with the Baltic States. The Russian military is expected to deploy nuclear-capable Tupolev Tu-95 and Tu-22M3 strategic bombers on the Crimean peninsula. Additionally, the Kremlin is setting up an Iskander missile deployment in Kaliningrad, the Russian territorial exclave on the Baltic Sea coast, for a military exercise. Russia’s state-run TASS news agency quoted a source close to the Russian Defense Ministry who noted, “Strategic missile carriers TU-22MS will be transferred to Crimea in the course of a surprise combat readiness inspection.”

In recent weeks it became evident that Putin had instructed his military commanders to place the faux peace-loving country’s nuclear weapons on full alert just in case the US and NATO decide to oppose Russia’s subjugation of Crimea.

Prominent Soviet-era dissident Mustafa Dzhemilev, spiritual leader of Crimea’s minority Tatar ethnic group, spoke of Crimea’s nuclearization during a press conference at the UN last month: “Crimea that used to be a tourist area is being turned into a military base... and the most alarming is that Crimea is likely to return into a nuclear weapons base.”

Russian threats against the former captive nations are well known but Putin’s global nuclear intimidations do not stop there. Other European countries have also been targeted.
Russia's ambassador in Denmark Mikhail Vanin said a couple of weeks ago that Moscow could aim nuclear missiles at Danish warships if Denmark joins NATO’s missile defense system.

Vanin said he believes the Danes do not completely understand the consequences if Copenhagen decides to join the US-led ballistic missile defense. “If this happens, Danish warships become targets for Russian nuclear missiles,” said Vanin.

Sarah Lain observed in the International Business Times: “The increase in snap military exercises, greater presence of Russian bomber patrols around European airspace and increased naval activity, particularly around the Baltics, are deliberate. Although Russia claims these are routine, and they do not violate international rules, they are intentionally provocative given the current tension with Europe.

“However, it is a more tenuous argument against NATO in the Baltics, when the Baltic States are already members. This may be a sign that Russia is becoming more extreme in its threats, in part because it is running out of options to leverage its position. Russia's threats of nuclear force show an escalation in, and at least rhetorical willingness, to extend the conflict beyond Ukraine. The Russian government and its press machine have also presented a new challenge in their alternative interpretation of facts to create a new narrative in justification of Russian policy. This makes meaningful negotiation and compromise very difficult, thus increasing the risk.”

It would be foolhardy to disparage Russia’s nuclear saber rattling. The Economist noted: “Others want nuclear weapons not to freeze the status quo, but to change it. Russia has started to wield nuclear threats as an offensive weapon in its strategy of intimidation. Its military exercises routinely stage dummy nuclear attacks on such capitals as Warsaw and Stockholm. Mr Putin’s speeches contain veiled nuclear threats. Dmitry Kiselev, one of the Kremlin’s mouthpieces, has declared with relish that Russian nuclear forces could turn America into ‘radioactive ash.’”

Hopefully no country on Earth will rain atomic bombs on another country. But, realistically, death and destruction are not only the result of a nuclear conflagration. As conventional wars show, including today’s Russian war against Ukraine, tanks, artillery, missiles and conventionally armed soldiers also shed innocent blood. Russians have killed more than 6,000 in Ukraine alone in the past 14 months. The Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-15 certainly cannot build confidence in anyone about Russia’s peaceful intentions.

Yakovenko’s article is nothing more than a flagrant lie that attempts to exonerate Russia’s aggression against Ukraine while promoting a nonexistent nuclear disarmament program.

Carl Bildt, a Swedish politician and diplomat who was his country’s prime minister from 1991 to 1994, and international affairs observer who recognizes the threat Russian poses today, recently noted that Russia’s trustworthiness and credibility are at their lowest levels in history. In other words, everything that is said and written that emanates from the Kremlin's officialdom is a falsehood that is meant to disinform civilized men and women.

Global terrorists, war mongers and aggressors may come and go but so far the one with the greatest staying power is Russia and no amount of hypocritical theatrical tears about global disarmament can relieve it of its guilt. The conversation about nuclear disarmament must go on but without deceitful Russia, which should be banished from the global table.

60,000-plus Russian Reasons Why Peace is Failing

With 60,000 fresh Russian troops and associated military hardware stationed on the Ukrainian border and ongoing Russian shelling of Ukrainian positions, why are world leaders and pundits bemoaning the lack of peace, ceasefire and progress in ending what they call the Ukrainian crisis but in reality is the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-15?

Ukrainian and Russian sources last week confirmed this massive, intimidating buildup of Russian firepower near Ukraine.

First Deputy Chairman of the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada Andriy Parubiy said on TV channel 5 on Saturday, March 28, the likelihood of a full-scale Russian attack remains high.

“The likelihood of a full-scale attack by Russian armies is high and remains high. All our intelligence indicates it. There is a concentration of Russian troops on the border and not only in Donetsk and Luhansk but extending up to Kharkiv, a huge expansion of Russian troops is taking place,” he said.

In an interview with “Novoe Vremia” on Friday, March 27, Parubiy, who a couple of weeks ago made the rounds of Capital Hill, updating lawmakers on Russia’s war against Ukraine, predicted that the next invasion could come before May 9 and would be designed to dramatically “demonstrate the might of the Russian army.”

Not only did last week see an escalation of Russian violence against Ukraine, but also a new series of threatening actions against all corners of the world that are setting off alarms among military and civilian officials. Russia has been intensifying the pace of military exercises in Eastern Europe and even the Arctic region.

Bloomberg News reported that Russian bomber aircraft are being sent to Crimea while forces in the Baltics and southern regions have been put on full alert in military exercises ordered by President Vladimir Putin.

Reuters reported that the latest military exercises have taken on a threatening posture. “While the most recent installment is not the largest exercise Russia has conducted, the areas involved and the forces included seem to have been deliberately chosen to send a warning to NATO; the exercise itself seems to simulate a full-scale confrontation with NATO through the forward deployment of nuclear armed submarines, theater ballistic missiles and strategic bomber aircraft. Strategic weapon systems, including assets that are part of Russia's nuclear capabilities, have also been deployed to locations near NATO's borders,” Reuters reported.

The news agency said the more notable systems involved are the Iskander mobile ballistic missiles and fighter aircraft that are being deployed to Kaliningrad, Tu-22M3 long-range strategic bombers that are being deployed to Crimea, and ballistic missile submarines that have been sent to sea with protective escorts.

The initial announcement about the exercise focused on the role of the Northern Fleet, Reuters reported, explaining the main reason of the drill was to test deployment times to Russian positions in Novaya Zemlya and Franz Josef Land. The agency further said Russia has increased its military presence in the Arctic, and the exercise highlights Russia's plans for the Arctic region.

However, the news service continued, though the obvious focus of the exercises is in the Arctic, operations have extended to include military activities along the Finnish border, the deployment of strategic weapons systems to Kaliningrad and Crimea, and positions throughout the Baltic Fleet, Black Sea Fleet, and in the western and southern military districts.

“This combination lifts the exercise beyond a simple deployment of ground forces and naval exercises in the Arctic and forms a nuclear narrative,” Reuters said.

With an eye toward the war in Ukraine and the faux truce, Reuters noted that “these exercises are an aggressive signal, particularly since they immediately follow Putin’s mysterious disappearance last week.” It also said “Russia has an interest in flexing its military muscle to remind everyone of the havoc it could wreak and to dissuade anyone from taking radical action in Ukraine.”

Reuters and others are inclined to point out that Washington unfortunately has been careful in addressing the war in Ukraine, even delaying the deployment of 300 US troops to western Ukraine as part of a training exercise. For its part, the US government maintains that this deployment is still an option and could order it as early as April. On the positive side, the US Congress favors American military aid for Ukraine.

One of the firmest supporters of Ukraine, Lithuania, as well as other former captive nations in the Baltic region, has been taking visible steps to defend its independence and sovereignty in case Russia crosses its border.

Jonas Vytautas Zukas, Lithuania’s chief of defense, said in several American newspapers Lithuania has learned a few lessons from the war in Ukraine.

According to Zukas, the situation in Ukraine has demonstrated that unconventional threats should be tackled instantly, using suitable military measures, even if martial law has not yet been imposed. The Seimas, Lithuania’s parliament, wisely adopted the Statute on the Use of the Armed Force on December 16, 2014, which proactively states that use of the military is now possible in peacetime when responding to unconventional threats that differ from armed aggression: for example in cases of provocation, attacks by armed groups, armed people crossing the state border etc.

Further, considering Russia’s widespread disinformation campaign, Zukas said another lesson is a better understanding of the importance of the informational war. He asserted that success in the information space plays an important role in an armed conflict. The armed forces and the media must ensure that society has access to objective information, he said. Capabilities are needed to ensure information and cyber-security, strategic communication and anti-propaganda activities.

The Russian war in Ukraine also taught that society – the nation – has to be prepared to act if there is a war, Zukas said. In early 2015 the Ministry of National Defense introduced a publication titled “What We Must Know to Prepare for Extreme Situations and War.” Zukas said a joint mobilization and civic resistance system is being developed. All-important concepts of public-spiritedness and patriotism are currently being promoted, and information about the Lithuanian armed forces and opportunities to undergo military training is also being advertised. Under President Poroshenko, Ukraine has also finally seen the merit of similar public-spiritedness and patriotism.

President of neighboring Estonia Toomas Ilves Hendrick recently said Europe has to have a backup plan that will provide new sanctions against Russia that could make it think twice about launching another war against its neighbors.

Speaking in Brussels, the headquarters of NATO, Ilves said anything could be expected from Russia. If new sanctions against Russian aggression do not stop Putin, EU countries should have a backup plan, he said.

“As for the Ukrainian crisis, it’s about security of the entire Europe rather than of a separate nation. In this connection, Europe must take a clear point of view, show its determination and strength. We are now discussing whether to arm Ukraine or step up sanctions against Russia. If it is decided not to do any of these things, does Europe have Plan B?" said Ilves.

Beyond boots and rifles, a senior Polish general has warned fellow NATO members that Russia will wage “hybrid war” through propaganda and “information aggression” to achieve its geopolitical goals in the region.

Gen. Stanisław Koziej, head of the president’s National Security Bureau, said last week that while many members of NATO are cutting defense budgets, Russia is increasing its defense spending — and aggression — in ways that “must be stopped.”

Latvia fears that a war of words between Russia and the West could degenerate into something worse, with “devastating” consequences, according to its foreign minister.

“I do hope that we all understand that any provocations, any deterioration of the situation, may lead to consequences that would be devastating to everyone, including, of course, to Russia,” Latvian Foreign Minister Edgars Rinkevics told Reuters.

He said a peace plan reached in Minsk in February is floundering, and warned that a “worst case scenario” – the full resumption of hostilities, could not be ruled out.

“But in that case, we should understand that ... there will be grave economic consequences for those who instigate that,” he said, referring to European Union sanctions already imposed on Russia.

“I hope that the Russian leadership in Moscow fully understands that, and is not going to get into irresponsible adventures.”

Beyond Russia’s threats against traditional European targets, there were reports last week that Moscow is eyeing increased subversion in Mexico and South America.

While the White House is not committed to supporting Ukraine with anything more than political and moral support – indeed Ukraine did receive 10 out of 200 camouflage-colored Humvees to ward of Russian invaders – US legislators favor a concrete show of military support for Kyiv.

American lawmakers voted overwhelmingly last Monday to urge President Obama to provide Ukraine with lethal weapons to defend itself against Russian aggression.

The House of Representatives approved the resolution in a broadly bipartisan 348-48 vote, heaping further pressure on the Obama administration to end its delays in providing weapons and other heavy military equipment to Kyiv forces.

The measure urges Obama to provide Ukraine with “lethal defensive weapon systems” that would enhance Ukraine’s ability to “defend their sovereign territory from the unprovoked and continuing aggression of the Russian Federation.”

House Speaker John Boehner described the vote as a call to action, and said Congress broadly supports more military aid. “Without action from this administration, Russia’s aggression will continue to be left unchecked,” he said after the vote.

This action also has the support of top US generals. Air Force General Philip Breedlove, a thought leader in this category, said last Sunday in Brussels the US should consider sending defensive weapons to Ukraine.

“I do not think that any tool of the US or any other nation’s power should necessarily be off the table,” said Breedlove, NATO’s top military commander. “Could it be destabilizing? The answer is yes. Inaction could also be destabilizing.”

Political and military observers have admitted that Vladimir Putin is behaving like Hitler did 75 years ago and that Putin must be stopped before he launches another campaign against an unsuspecting neighbor. Some have correctly elaborated that while a Hitler may have periodically surfaced in individual countries, but in Russia, all of its leaders – tsarist, communist and federal presidents – are imperialists by nature. So why is there inaction?

“If a Russian invasion of the Baltic States could not be deterred or defeated, the North Atlantic Council and the US president would be faced with a very unpleasant choice: conduct a costly counteroffensive and risk nuclear escalation, or abandon the Baltics to renewed subservience to Moscow. Such a catastrophic failure to uphold the mutual defense responsibilities of NATO could cripple or even destroy the North Atlantic alliance, one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s primary goals. It is therefore of paramount importance to deter Russian aggression before it happens,” urged Terrence Kelly in US News & World Report.

Former foreign ministers of Sweden and Poland, Carl Bildt and Radosław Sikorski, warned the EU about the Putin’s warlike intentions concerning Ukraine, but Brussels was asleep, Bildt said in an interview with Radio Liberty last week, according to Ukrainian newspaper Yevropeiska Pravda.

“And then [we should] make certain that we truly help them with all the reforms necessary, because Ukraine is going to go through a tough time and they need our solidarity, sympathy, and support. These things, I think, are the priorities,” Bildt said.

Sensing a threat to its island nation, British officials are also advocating that London urgently rebuild defense capabilities abandoned after the Cold War to face growing global threats, including from Russia, a committee of lawmakers warned on last week. The Commons Defense Committee, which examines the spending and policy of the defense ministry, said nuclear capacity, tanks, warships and aircraft were needed to deter Putin.

“The world is more dangerous and unstable than at any time since the end of the Cold War,” the report said, referring to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and seizure of territory by Islamic State and Boko Haram militants. “But the UK’s current defense assumptions are not sufficient for this changed environment... The UK must rebuild its conventional capacities eroded since the Cold War.”

Russia’s war against Ukraine is not a local issue. It has ramifications for the entire world. Russia has destabilized peace around the world with its belligerence and it must be held responsible for its hostility. Peace and security of the entire planet is at stake.

Ukraine’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Yuriy Sergeyev, speaking last Friday in Allentown, PA, urged the global community to watch the war in Ukraine because it isn’t a national or regional issue.

“The entire globe has been challenged,” he correctly observed, referring to the Russia's takeover of Crimea. “The whole system of international order has been destroyed.”

With an armed Russia salivating at the prospect of invasion and subjugation, global peace and countries near and far are at risk.

Short of implementing USAF Gen. Curtis LeMay’s Vietnam War era formula for victory by bombing the enemy into the Stone Age, free world leaders today should think relentlessly about how to contain Russian expansionism. First of all, they must emphatically and in unison declare to Russia the detrimental consequences of pursuing its current belligerent policies. The free world should maintain economic and trade sanctions against Russia, Russian businesses and oligarchs. They should initiate a campaign to expel Russia from the UN Security Council, which its representative Vitaly Churkin abuses with lies, fabrications and disinformation. Moscow should also be banished from all global events and shunted to the sidelines of any conference, mission, project or plan. Take away the World Cup 2018 from Moscow. Russia must be universally condemned as an outlaw, aggressive and terrorist state.

If there is any hope of transforming Russia into law-abiding, civilized member of the international community of nations and bringing peace and stability to all countries, then the free world must persuade rich and common, famous, infamous and nameless Russians that their only course to redemption is not via far-right rallies but rather without Vladimir Putin.