Trump Draws First Blood

The eyes of the free world and the former captive nations have been on the Oval Office ever since Donald J. Trump became the 45th President of the United States.

The reason is that Trump alienated himself from many American voters by expressing tolerance for Vladimir Putin’s aggression in Ukraine and threats against other countries. Trump also denied that Crimea was invaded, occupied and illegally annexed by Russia.

Trump singlehandedly overturned the seven-decade-long pro-captive nations stance of the Republican Party.

On the campaign trail, Trump revealed his acceptance of Putin by blatantly praising him, raising predictable disdain in Europe and the US. His support for the Russian leader held fast despite the shocked outcry by voters. Meanwhile, American intelligence and law enforcement officials’ announcement that they would look into contacts between Trump’s national security adviser Michael Flynn and a top Russian diplomat.

If that weren’t enough, Trump shocked Ukraine and Ukrainian Americans by saying that he would break ranks with European allies and cancel sanctions on Russia for invading Ukraine if the Kremlin agreed to reduce its nuclear arms.

Behind the Kremlin walls, with the votes tabulated, Trump’s praise of Putin led Russian officials and USA watchers at many inauguration parties to publicly hope for warmer relations under Trump’s presidency. In other words they hoped that the US commander in chief will look the other way when Russia invades peaceful neighbors or violates human rights at home.

After his election, Trump began building a team that included officials who share his point of view and those who don’t.

Trump’s candidate for secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, the former top Mobil-Exxon executive with very close ties to Russia and Putin, was seen as typical of Trump’s benevolent view of Putin and tolerance for Russia’s imperial adventurism. The line in the sand was drawn early in the new President’s term as Democratic and Republican lawmakers sought to brow beat the opposing lineup with strongly-worded warnings.

Senators John McCain, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham and others had led the charge for the GOP against Tillerson’s appointment while Sen. Charles Schumer and his colleagues did so on behalf of Democrats. Obviously, the new President wasn’t budging. He repeated his pledge that he would work to Putin, deal with him, and plan a future with him rather than without.

President Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine and leaders of the other former captive nations expressed disquiet that they would be losing the vital and visible support of the United States at a time when Russia is waging a war in Ukraine and rattling its sabers in Eastern Europe.

The memory of Vice-President Joe Biden’s five trips to Ukraine and strong advocacy for the countries that freed themselves from Russia’s prison of nations is still fresh in the region’s capitals.

Throughout his tenure at the White House, Biden played the unofficial role of President Barak Obama’s special envoy to Ukraine, and since the 2016 election, he has worked to instill Ukraine’s importance on the new administration. Asked by reporters if he thought his efforts were successful, Biden responded only that “hope springs eternal.”

Indeed, the x-captive nations have been in that state of earnest hope for decades if not centuries.

Kyiv officials are worried that Trump could relegate their country to Russia’s sphere of influence, denying Ukraine’s Western aspirations. Ukrainian officials and citizens – as well as Ukrainian Americans – have long feared that the West could “sell out” Ukraine by forcing a bad peace. But no one suspected that unfaithfulness would come from Washington. And forcing a bad peace on Ukraine turned out not to be a far-fetched idea. Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry this week protested after media reported that Kyiv would be excluded from US-Russia talks about the war and its future.

Ian Bateson, a freelance journalist, cited the following in The Huffington Post: “Commentators constantly refer to the Munich 1938 agreement, implying that the West will once again attempt to appease the aggressor,” Kostiantyn Fedorenko, a political analyst at the Institute for Euro-Atlantic Cooperation, told The World Post. “This, in their view, would be done via [the] lifting of US sanctions on Russia.”

In an op-ed in The New York Times, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin expressed hope that Trump would be a strong leader for Ukraine as well as for the United States. Poroshenko, in his remarks after meeting with Biden, said he looked forward to working with the Trump administration, and Ukrainian media reported that Ukrainian Ambassador to the US Valeriy Chaly said he also emphasized Ukraine’s importance in a conversation with Trump.  

At last Saturday’s women’s marches in Washington, New York City and elsewhere, Ukrainian American women and their righteous brothers joined the protests by demanding that Putin withdraw Russian armies and mercenaries from Ukraine and that Washington under President Trump would continue supporting Ukraine.

On Monday, January 23, opposition to Trump’s pro-Russian and anti-Ukrainian posture suddenly crumbled like a house of cards. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted in favor of Tillerson’s appointment as the secretary of state. All Republicans that had criticized Trump’s “reset” policies with Russia and Tillerson’s too-close-for-comfort relationship with Putin caved and supported his candidacy like obedient schoolchildren. On the other hand, all Democrats on the panel held fast and voted against him.

What is baffling about this battle of wills is that Tillerson’s views and testimony may not be firmly pro-Ukrainian, but he is also not toeing the line of his boss. Tillerson said he didn’t accept Rubio’s description of Putin as a war criminal but he did say Russia had no legitimate claim on Ukraine. He also said he would have provided Ukraine with defensive weapons and make a show of US and NATO border surveillance and intelligence-sharing. Tillerson was non-committal about lifting sanctions, preferring to say it would be better to maintain the status quo.

As for GOP mea culpa, McCain and Graham attempted to explain their betrayal of Ukrainian interests by jointly stating:

“After careful consideration, and much discussion with Mr. Tillerson, we have decided to support his nomination to be secretary of state. Though we still have concerns about his past dealings with the Russian government and President Vladimir Putin, we believe that Mr. Tillerson can be an effective advocate for US interests.

“Now more than ever, with America's friends growing more discouraged and our enemies growing more emboldened, we need a secretary of state who recognizes that our nation cannot succeed in the world by itself. We must strengthen our alliances and partnerships across the globe, and marshal them to defend our shared vision of world order. It is the American people more than anyone else who have benefited from this long tradition of US global leadership. The views that Mr. Tillerson has expressed, both privately and publicly during the confirmation process, give us confidence that he will be a champion for a strong and engaged role for America in the world.”

Rubio, who was considered a solid hold out against Tillerson, explained that his support of Tillerson’s selection focused not just on his qualifications, but also on his views about the role of democracy and human rights in shaping our foreign policy.

“I have no doubts about Mr. Tillerson’s qualifications and patriotism. He has an impressive record of leadership and the proven ability to manage a large and complex organization. What I focused on from the beginning is whether as secretary of state he will make the defense of liberty, democracy and human rights a priority,” Rubio said in a statement.

He was also encouraged by some of his other answers. “He acknowledged that Russia conducted a campaign of active measures designed to undermine our elections. He stated that Russia’s taking of Crimea was illegal and illegitimate. He affirmed that our NATO ‘Article V commitment is inviolable.’ He endorsed the Magnitsky Act. He accurately characterized the conflict in eastern Ukraine as a Russian invasion, and he supports providing defensive weapons to Ukraine,” Rubio said.

However, Rubio admitted, Tillerson’s answers on a number of other important questions were troubling. But that didn’t keep him from voting for his approval.

Tillerson did not share Rubio’s view that Putin should be called a war criminal and he did not condemn Russia’s repeated violations of the Minsk II agreement. He also noted Tillerson’s comment that he would support sanctions on Putin for meddling in US elections but only if they met the impossible condition that they not affect US businesses operating in Russia.

“Given the uncertainty that exists both at home and abroad about the direction of our foreign policy, it would be against our national interests to have this confirmation unnecessarily delayed or embroiled in controversy. Therefore, despite my reservations, I will support Mr. Tillerson’s nomination in committee and in the full Senate,” Rubio said.

Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH), also an endorser of Tillerson, said in response to his questions Tillerson declared his support for “defensive lethal assistance to allow the Ukrainians to defend themselves, which would be a welcome change from the Obama administration position. Because of these commitments, I am pleased to support Mr. Tillerson’s nomination and I look forward to helping him implement the policies needed to fulfill them.”

Portman’s reference to Tillerson’s support for sending lethal weapons to Ukraine, a major form of military aid that would doubtlessly help Ukraine in its war with Russia, was abnormally omitted by the other lawmakers.

In voting against Tillerson, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) said:  “Finally, as I said at the hearing, at a time when Russia’s continuing aggression around the world and interference in our election must be at the top of America’s diplomatic agenda and of chief concern to our secretary of state, it is incredibly troublesome that Mr. Tillerson and President Trump had not discussed the specifics of their Russia policy.”

Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) explained his negative vote by saying: “On Russia more broadly, I am concerned as to whether Mr. Tillerson would counsel President Trump to keep current sanctions in place – which includes leading our European allies in this most important of endeavors. He showed little interest in advancing the new Russia sanctions legislation I’ve introduced with Senator McCain and colleagues on both sides of the aisle. Russia attacked us through cyber warfare and has committed even greater atrocities in Ukraine, Syria, and Eastern Europe. They must be held accountable and our bipartisan legislation is an important tool to do so.

“Strangely, he was quick to caution about easing sanctions on Cuba because it would benefit a repressive regime, but seemed indifferent to doing business with Russia knowing that that business helped finance their ongoing violations of international norms.”

Both yea and nay voting senators used the same characteristics of the candidate to substantiate their decisions to support or reject Tillerson’s appointment.

So what happened in the hearing room? There are more questions than there are answers. Is Tillerson a ringer for pro-Ukrainian advocates? Were the senators trying to enforce their will on a stubborn President? Do the x-captive nations have nothing to fear?

Judging by this administration’s track record, Ukrainians’ great expectations could still be gone with the wind. With the Cabinet divided between pro and anti-Ukrainian officials, critical administration decisions could be frozen when Putin orders his tanks to move west or worse Trump will dictate his pro-Putin point of view. What can the free world expect from the United States and its officials when ardent American supporters of the former captive nations succumb to the President’s pressure or charm and abandon their valiant positions on the barricades of freedom? America first is not a forceful solution to threat of global subjugation.

By drawing first blood, Trump, whose stated opinions on Russia are not clouded in mystery, has demonstrated that he has political stubbornness and power to force his will upon the Washington establishment. This does not bode well for the x-captive nations, which have hoped for a better destiny a quarter of a century after they regained their sovereign independence.

Freedom-loving Americans will have to mobilize their memberships and take this righteous campaign on the road to the offices of their elected officials, the Congress and White House just like they did defending human rights activists during the Soviet phase of Russian imperialism.

Now, with Trump in office, Russia certainly will not abandon its aggressive policies to rebuild the glory of mother Russia and repair the torn curtain. But without Washington’s unwavering support, Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and the others will be left to arm and defend themselves against Russian imperialism.

Ambassador Power’s High-Ground Legacy

Emblematic of her historic oratory as US Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Samantha Power concluded her high-ground career the way she began it. In her final address on January 17, she figuratively grabbed the international community by its lapels and shook it – diplomatically – so it wouldn’t neglect the fate of the world and the former captive nations.

The Ambassador did not waste the opportunity to warn incoming President Donald J. Trump and the new officials Inside the Beltway that Russia is the single major threat facing the United States.

After citing the friendlier moments from US-Russian contentious relations, including mutual concerns regarding radical Islamic terrorism, Ambassador Power declared: “Having said that, anyone who has seen my debates in the UN Security Council with Russia knows that I and my government have long had serious concerns about its government’s aggressive and destabilizing actions.”

She went on to detail how Russian President Vladimir Putin has weakened the “rules-based order” that has benefitted the global community for seven decades.

“Our values, our security, our prosperity, and our very way of life are tied to this order. And we – and by we, I mean the United States and our closest partners – must come together to prevent Russia from succeeding,” she declared.

The US diplomat listed the following musts: better understanding and education the American public about how Russia is changing this historic order; reaffirming American commitment to the rules and institutions have undergirded this order for many years; using new tools to counter Russian tactics for undermining this order; and addressing the vulnerabilities in America’s democracy that Russia’s attacks have exposed and exacerbated.

“To do this, we cannot let Russia divide us. If we confront this threat together, we will adapt and strengthen the order on which our interests depend,” Power urged.

While she didn’t mention any US official by name, including President-elect Trump, even a cursory viewing of the today’s news would reveal that America is more divided today than any time in the past. Russia’s fifth column activity and psychological operations have certainly contributed to this dangerous state that can make the US ripe for picking by Moscow as I wrote in a previous blog.

Ambassador Power clarified that the international order that Russia is threatening includes the UN Charter and its rule that the borders between sovereign states should be respected, an obvious allusion to Russia’s numerous recent invasions of sovereign UN member-states.

“The vast majority of countries recognize that we all benefit from having rules of the road that constrain certain kinds of behavior to enhance our shared security – rules that must not be rewritten by force,” she said.

To be sure, she continued, the United States has not always lived up to what it preaches. However, she said, despite shortcomings under President Obama, the Unites States has shown its commitment to investing in and abiding by the rules-based international order.

“The same cannot be said for the Russian government today. For years, we have seen Russia take one aggressive and destabilizing action after another. We saw it in March 2014 – not long after mass peaceful protests in Ukraine brought to power a government that favored closer ties with Europe – when Russia dispatched its soldiers to the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea. The ‘little green men,’ as they came to be called – for Russia denied any ties to them – rammed through a referendum at the barrel of a gun, which Mr. Putin then used to justify his sham annexation of Crimea,” Power recalled.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, first in Crimea and a few months later in the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, has been a recurring theme of Ambassador Power’s speeches at UN Security Council meetings. In her remarks she often cited evidence of Russia’s arming, training and fighting alongside the separatist-terrorists. Moscow’s reply was standard: It denied any role, flouting, as she said, the international obligation to respect territorial integrity of its neighbor.

Power also included Russia’s support for Bashar al-Assad’s brutal war in Syria and then participation in the assault against Syrian people which resulted in killing thousands of innocent civilians in her list of Moscow’s evil doings.

But the list doesn’t end there.

“We saw it in Russia’s efforts to undercut the credibility of international institutions like the UN. For example, in an emergency UN Security Council meeting last month, then-Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the member-states that the Assad regime forces and Iranian militias were reportedly disappearing men as they took parts of eastern Aleppo. In response, the representative of Russia – which was providing air cover for the offensive – not only claimed that Russian investigations had uncovered ‘not a single report of ill treatment or violations of international humanitarian law against civilians of eastern Aleppo,’ but also accused the Secretary-General of basing his information on ‘fake news.’ Minutes later, Syria’s representative echoed Russia’s line, holding up as proof what he claimed was a photograph of a Syrian government soldier helping an elderly woman. The only problem was that the photo was taken six months earlier, in June 2016. In Fallujah, Iraq,” she said.

Russia’s assault against the world continued apace. Power said Russia sought to systematically sow doubt and division in democracies, and drive a wedge between the US and its closest allies, and supported illiberal parties like France’s National Front, which has a xenophobic, anti-Muslim platform.

Russia also took aim at Germany. The Ambassador cited German intelligence agencies to disclose that groups linked to the Russian government carried out a massive May 2015 attack targeting the German parliament, energy companies, telecoms, and even universities. Recently, Germany’s domestic intelligence agency reported an alarming spike in “aggressive and increased cyber-spying and cyber-operations that could potentially endanger German government officials, members of parliament, and employees of democratic parties,” which the agency attributed to Russian hackers. The head of Germany’s foreign intelligence service said the perpetrators’ aim is “delegitimizing the democratic process.”

This abominable list of crimes and dirty actions belong to Putin’s Russia, which President-elect refuses to acknowledge while continuing to favor Moscow versus US government officials and evidence to the contrary.

“It is in this context that one must view the Russian government’s latest efforts to interfere in America’s democracy,” Ambassador Power forebodingly warned.

“As our intelligence community found, we know that the Russian government sought to interfere in our presidential election, with the goals of undermining public faith in the US democratic process, denigrating one candidate, and helping the other candidate. Our intelligence agencies assess that the campaign was ordered by President Putin, and implemented by a combination of Russian government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and government-paid trolls.”

Disputing thoughts that the string of Russia’s global interventions is unrelated, Power pointed out that the common thread is not in anything the Russia supports but rather in what Moscow is against.

“Not in the rules it follows, but in the ones it breaks. Russia’s actions are not standing up a new world order. They are tearing down the one that exists. This is what we are fighting against – having defeated the forces of fascism and communism, we now confront the forces of authoritarianism and nihilism,” she said.

Her previous comment points, as I have written in this blog, to a common thread of authoritarianism, nihilism, aggression, belligerence, repression, subjugation, persecution and murder that runs through all that wield power in the Kremlin regardless of era or politics.

One reason why Russia has unleashed such a destructive campaign against the world order, she surmised, “is to regain a sense of its past glory, or to get back at the countries that it blames for the break-up of the Soviet Union, which President Putin has called the ‘greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the twentieth century.’”

In other words, to repair the torn curtain and rebuild its prison of nations.

So what is the world going to do to address this threat, she asked.

First, Power said, is to work in a bipartisan fashion to determine the full extent of Russia’s interference in the US recent elections, identify the vulnerabilities of the American democratic system, and come up with targeted recommendations for preventing future attacks.

She explained that the purpose of such an effort is to identify the gaps in American defenses that Russia exploited – “as well as other gaps that may not have been seized upon in this attack, but that Russia or others could take advantage of in the future. And the purpose is to determine the steps needed to close such gaps and strengthen the resilience of our system.”

She said it would be naïve and negligent to consider that just because Russia was once caught committing these crimes that it or any other country wouldn’t do it again.

“Allowing politics to get in the way of determining the full extent of Russia’s meddling and how best to protect our democracy would undermine our core national security interests,” she said.

Next, she continued, the US has to do a better job of informing Americans about the seriousness of the threat the Russian government poses. Unity here is crucial, she emphasized, because when making conflicting messages about a threat Russia poses, the American people receive mixed messages.

This consequently leads to confusion and national confusion about what is the threat, who is the enemy and what’s to be done about it gives the perpetrator – Russia – the opportunity to intensify its assault not only against the US but also Ukraine, the x-captive nations, and the free world.

Ambassador Power cited an alarming statistic that 37% of Republicans today hold a favorable view of Putin, up from just 10% in July 2014. Any favorable opinion of Putin is deplorable, but coming from the GOP is more disgraceful. Where are Goldwater, Nixon and Reagan when the US needs them?

She urged the new Administration to maintain Washington’s robust support for NATO while making clear America’s steadfast commitment to treat an attack on any NATO member as an attack on us all as well as expectations that all NATO allies will do their part in keeping the alliance strong.

“That also means maintaining the sanctions placed on Russia, including those imposed by President Obama in response to Russia’s meddling in our election. Now, some have argued that the most effective way to get Russia to start playing by the rules that undergird the international order is actually by easing sanctions. If only we reduce the pressure, they claim, Russia will stop lashing out against the international order. But they have it backwards: easing punitive measures on the Russian Government when they haven’t changed their behavior will only embolden Russia – sending the message that the best way to gain international acceptance of its destabilizing actions is simply to wait us out. And that will not only encourage more dangerous actions by Russia, but also by other rule-breakers like Iran and North Korea, which are constantly testing how far they can move the line without triggering a response,” she said.

Power also discounted any suggestion that the United States should put recent transgressions aside and announce another “reset” with Russia.

She warned against continuing to use the same tactics and means against Russia that seem to have succeeded in the recent past because now cyberspace attacks and fake news have entered the realm of possible weapons. Power noted that Russia’s willingness to lie turned reporting into an “on the one hand, on the other hand” story, even in respected outlets like the New York Times, the BBC and CNN.

“In other words, lying is a strategic asset. It didn’t matter whether Russia’s accounts were accurate or even consistent; all that mattered was that Russia injected enough counterclaims into the news cycle to call into question who was responsible,” she added.

In a pithy phrase: “Deny and lie.”

Another method of fighting Russia’s assault, Power said, is to continue to seek ways to engage directly with the Russian people and their government.

“It can be easy to forget that virtually all the tactics the Russian Government is using to undermine democracy abroad are ones they fine-tuned on the Russian people, to devastating effect. After all, when Russian soldiers are killed fighting in a conflict in eastern Ukraine that their government denies it has any role in – it’s Russian mothers, widows, and orphans who are denied the benefits and recognition they deserve as the family members of slain soldiers. The mafias that the Russian government uses to sow corruption abroad profit most off the backs of the Russian people. And it is Russian journalists and human rights defenders who have been harassed, beaten, and even killed for uncovering their government’s abuses,” she said, cautioning that it is important to distinguish between the Russian government and people.

The US should continue engaging with the Russian government by collaborating on issues of shared interest to demonstrate that both countries have more to gain by working to shore up the system of shared rules and principles than by destroying it.

But at the same time the US should be vigilant and responsive to its ongoing transgressions.

By renewing American people’s faith in the democratic system and principles that the Founding Fathers created, which Russia intends to destroy, will help Washington persevere against Moscow, she said.

“But we know not only what we are against; we know what we are for. So, just as we are clear-eyed about the threat Russia poses from the outside, and unified in confronting it, we must also dedicate ourselves to restoring citizens’ faith in our democracy on the inside – which always has been the source of America’s strength, and always will be our best defense against any foreign power that tries to do us harm,” she concluded.

Ambassador Power will be retiring from her post on Friday, January 20. Without a doubt, her departure from the hallowed halls of the United Nations and US government will leave a large gap that must be filled by her successor. Ukraine and the former captive nations will lose a strong advocate in the face of Russia’s ceaseless aggression. The free world will lose a steadfast champion for human rights, liberties and the moral high road.

Without presupposing the future, the incoming Administration is not of this vital mindset. The designated US Permanent Representative, Nikki Haley, has not yet revealed her beliefs.

However, the US and Haley must be inclined to pursue Ambassador Power’s high-ground policies not merely for the benefit of the former captive nations but because Washington is honor bound not to shirk from its moral values of preserving and fostering democratic principles, human rights and morals in a world gone haywire.

Will Putin Push Russian Troops west to Kyiv, Lviv & Beyond?

The Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-17 has been going on for three years and it has resulted in the occupation of Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk regions of Ukraine. Its duration so far is about half of World War II, Europe’s last continental military conflagration. So, will Vladimir Putin continue driving Russia’s military machine across Ukraine into Western Europe?

The simple answer is yes, he will, and wishing it weren’t so won’t make it so.

Russian global expansion is its historical manifest destiny – regardless of who is in the Kremlin – and trampling Ukraine’s independence and sovereignty is the means by which Moscow will rebuild its empire. After all, Russia is continuing to mobilize troops on both sides of the Ukrainian border, which doesn’t bode well for peace and stability in Ukraine and the region.

According to Ukrainian Defense Minister Stepan Poltorak, a 40,000-strong diversified Russian army has recently been formed in occupied Donbas, of which 5,000 are Russian regular troops.

Poltorak said Russia has massed about 600 tanks, 1,300 combat vehicles, 860 artillery systems and 300 multiple launch rocket systems on Ukrainian territory. Military affairs observer and member of Verkhovna Rada Dmytro Tymchuk also warned of large-scale Russia military buildup along the border with Ukraine.

“Of course, with this military build-up, it is very difficult to talk about peace, especially with those who do not wish to fulfill the Minsk agreements or is very aggressively against Ukraine,” Poltorak said in an interview with TV Channel 5.

During the past few weeks, including during Christmas observances, which was designated as a holiday truce, Russian forces and their mercenary terrorists have been attacking Ukrainian positions in eastern Ukraine, killing many defenders. Ukrainian military spokesmen have said that the assaults marked a significant escalation in deadly engagements.

With the fighting spiking, the only question that remains is when will Russia unleash the full fury of its imperial assault?

Dr. Adam Lelonek, in an article earlier this month on the Polish-language website Defence24.pl, expressed the point of view that such an expansion is inevitable because Russia will not permit Ukraine to integrate itself in EuroAtlantic structures.

However, Lelonek pointed out, Russia will not yet commence a major ground war but will rather unleash an overwhelmingly vile campaign of dirty operations meant to destabilize Ukraine and camouflage its intentions from Western capitals.

Lelonek cited Ukrainian experts and pundits who believe that while a full-blown war may not come in 2017, that doesn’t mean that Russia hasn’t already begun planning for such an eventuality. After all, he reminded readers that launching a war is not a spur of the moment idea. Wars and invasions take months if not years of preparations before soldiers are put in harm’s way.

Russia’s invasion of the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea wasn’t arbitrarily done two weeks after the conclusion of the 2014 Winter Olympics. Planning began many months earlier, while free world leaders were probably busy glad-handing Putin at a conference or summit.

While Russia is busy with Syria and elections in Western Europe, Putin understands that at the present time it is a cheaper and safer option to destabilize Ukraine, dishearten the Ukrainian population, discredit the government, isolate it from the West, create a viable fifth column operation, and weaken all levels of the country to the point where Moscow can just pick up the pieces and stick them in its pocket.

According to Lelonek, Moscow’s master plan also calls for destabilizing the internal situations and foreign policies of Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Polish, Belarus, Slovakia, Moldova, the Czech Republic and Germany.

As recent history shows, this operation doesn’t require an army. Destabilization could be the result of fake news, hacking, sabotaging elections, or sleeper agents. Even confusion and indecisiveness can slow down the wheels of government enough to destabilize a country.

“Western experts still seem to mostly ignore the fact that Russian plans, including military campaigns, are prepared for the long run. Scenarios for the annexation of the Crimea or military actions in Donbas were prepared long before the Revolution of Dignity, and the dismantling of the Ukrainian defense structures and infiltration of the Ukrainian state structures by the Russian secret services were being done years in advance for the benefit of the future,” Lelonek observed.

The Polish author added that Russia is also counting on a worsening of relations among Washington, Moscow and Beijing that would distract the world’s attention from Ukraine as well as the West’s ultimate fatigue and boredom with the issue of Ukraine.

Another flashpoint that will be exacerbated by Russia to destabilize Ukraine will be inciting conflicts between the Moscow Patriarchate’s Orthodox Church in Ukraine and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church as well as between the Orthodox Church and the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.

“There is no indication of the probability of a tragedy this year, however, the majority of Ukrainian experts (theoreticians and practitioners) are nonetheless convinced that a full-scale war is only a matter of time. If Russia recognizes that it cannot stop Ukraine’s progress to the West, most likely, it will decide to apply maximum effort to destroy or seize as many resources as it can including demographic, intellectual, technological and natural,” Lelonek projected.

Andrey Illarionov, a Russian economist and Putin’s former economic policy advisor, was quoted by UA Today and channel 112 as saying that Moscow will take advantage of the interregnum in the United States to intensify provocations against Ukraine.

“This November, before and after the November 8, is the best situation for destabilization. We understand that the US presidential election is the time when neither American administration, nor the political powers in the US and Europe will care about Ukraine. The world will be focused on the developments in the US, and election results,” Illarionov said.

According to him, the world’s attention will be distracted by the US elections and inauguration, creating an ideal situation for Russia “with little or no risk to hold its campaigns in the various countries of the world.” Even a cursory review of American newspapers will reveal that the US is in such an unsafe state of flux about where are its foreign loyalties.

Illarionov reminded that Russia is capable of launching conventional and non-conventional weapons from its well-stocked arsenal against Ukraine – “Nothing can be ruled out” – in order to stop Kyiv’s westward movement.

In an interview with well-known columnist Paul Goble, Illarionov further clarified that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine cannot be called a conflict, but rather it is a war. “This is not a crisis. This is a war. The war in the simplest meaning of the word,” he said.

“This is a Russian-Ukrainian war. To be more precise, this is Putin’s war against Ukraine. Most Russians do not support the war. Putin’s war against Ukraine is already a long-term one.”

I have been referring to it as the Russo-Ukraine War for a couple of years.

Like Lelonek, Illarionov also said he was sure that preparations for the war took years – at least 11 years. “Since 2003. I can say that certain questions relating to the future war with Ukraine were discussed in my presence. I didn't think the talks would really lead to a real war,” he said.

This observation must sink in for western leaders. While they were shaking hands with Putin, toasting him with Russian vodka, signing agreements, and praising his accomplishments, he was busy planning his invasion of Ukraine and other countries.

Illarionov recalled that in year 2004 preparations were already discussed for the future occupation and annexation of Crimea but were suspended during the Orange Revolution. In 2008, Russian Journal published the leaked plan of the military command “in which you will see a detailed draft project of a war against Ukraine.” Information about actions to support separatists in Ukraine began to appear in 2009, he added.

“So, they were preparing the war for a long time. The other matter is that it is a long war that has been continuing for more than 16 months. It was officially launched on July 27, 2013, by Putin's speech in Kyiv on the occasion of the anniversary of the baptism of Kyivan Rus. You can find here clear remarks about the start of the hybrid campaign, an intervention, but not a war,” Goble observed on the basis of Illarionov’s remarks.

Indeed, in the July 29, 2013, edition of The Torn Curtain 1991 newsletter, I also forecast that Putin’s arm twisting of Ukrainian leaders at that event would ultimately lead to Russia’s violent attempt to rebuild the torn iron curtain one way or another: “In Ukraine for the commemoration of Christianity of Kyivan Rus (ancient Ukraine), Putin made it a point to urge Ukraine to unite with Russia because, after all, they’re ‘one people.’ Nothing smacks of a restoration of the Russian prison of nations and the iron curtain more than that.”

Goble wrote in his current column that Illarionov believes the war won’t end in the nearest time.

Illarionov made similar observations to Paul Roderick Gregory in Forbes. The Russian pundit said Putin has already begun waging another type of war throughout Ukraine, one that is being conducted by Russian Spetsnaz (special operations) forces and KGB (now called FSB) agents and its aims is to topple the pro-Western government in Kyiv – destabilization.

The Spetsnaz’ orders include the sowing of civil unrest throughout Ukraine via strikes, demonstrations, staged incidents, and street battles. Putin’s subversive forces will also orchestrate neo-Nazi incidents with Nazi regalia and swastikas on full display. Their mandates also include the deliberate killing of Russian soldiers and of ethnic Russian civilians to prove the hatred and extremism of radical Ukrainian nationalists. These orders come from Putin himself, Illarionov said. Their mission is to create an image of intolerable chaos and loss of civil authority to justify a Russian takeover of all Ukraine. Putin’s goal is the destruction of pro-Western authority in Ukraine, the total humiliation of the West, and a makeover of the geopolitical balance.

Illarionov’s assessment is similar to that of Lelonek. Destabilize Ukraine and make it ripe for the picking.

His urgent advice to President Poroshenko of Ukraine is to place all your efforts into preserving civil order and avoid falling for the Spetsnaz provocations. In other words, the nation shouldn’t become a patsy.

Ukrainian authorities must immediately close all borders with Russia to slow the infiltration of Spetsnaz and FSB destabilization units. The American government has also advised this and is in the process of providing Kyiv a range of sophisticated border control systems.

The free world is also tasked with containing Russian expansion. Illarionov urges the West to understand Putin’s grand vision for restoring the “historic glory of Mother Russia.” He and others are convinced that if Russia is successful in re-subjugating Ukraine, the balance of power in Europe and the world would change for the worse and lead to further “restorations” of the former Soviet Union and ultimately to rebuilding the prison of nations.

So it’s merely a matter of time when Putin will unleash his hordes to reconquer Ukraine and the other x-captive nations.

Illarionov also explained to the Lithuanian Tribune that it’s not only about Ukraine. Russian laws essentially define four categories of Russians, he said: ethnic Russians, irrespective of whether they reside in or outside Russia; Russian-speakers, irrespective of their nationality; all former citizens of the Soviet Union and their offspring living in the territories formerly covered by the USSR; and former citizens of the Russian Empire (pre-1917) and their offspring living in the territories once covered by the Russian Empire.

“Such a legal base allows the Russian army to protect all the Russians listed in the law. Therefore, for the Russian side, such actions of the Russian army beyond Russian borders might seem completely legitimate,” Illarionov elaborated.

The x-captive nations appreciate the dangerous situation they are in and have been increasing their military budgets in hopes of building armed forces strong enough to counter a full-scale Russian blitzkrieg.

Russia’s thirst for new conquests or return of its empire will not be sated by President-elect Trump’s misguided belief in Putin’s wholesomeness and integrity. The free world should not hesitate to vigorously thwart Putin’s war by preparing accordingly.

Some US officials, congressmen and pundits have been warning Russia about this dangerous, destabilizing trend. They have placed their hope for a safer world on a new round of intensified sanctions against Moscow that will force it to withdraw from occupied Ukrainian regions.

As in the past, so too in the future, this generation will be asked, what did you do to oppose Russian expansion and protect the world from new colonialism?

Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-17 Continues

As Russia’s crimes mount faster than world leaders can track them, I’d like to return to the raging Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-17.

Except for Ukrainian and x-captive nations’ news media, very few western traditional or cyber media are still conscientiously reporting on Russia’s military advances against Ukraine and the defending troops’ valiant retaliations. Stories from the front have been supplanted by Russian prevarications about its invasion of Ukraine, occupation of Crimea, bombardment of Aleppo, hacking of America’s cyber infrastructure, and other visible and invisible crimes. Some of the accounts even seem to absolve Russia of any culpability for its obvious wrongdoings.

Well-intentioned, mortified and angry US officials and lawmakers are incessantly and justly demanding sanctions against Russia and its tyrant leader for hacking US political parties’ computers.

Get in line. The Russian leadership has been committing a long list of crimes for which it must be held accountable.

But back to the war that Russia launched against Ukraine in February 2014 by invading and occupying Crimea and then invading eastern Ukraine. Intense fighting is continuing, Ukrainian soldiers and civilians are being killed by regular Russian troops, mercenaries and traitors in Ukraine. Russia is still pulling military weapons across the border and positioning them for bloody shelling of Ukrainian military and non-military targets.

While the Ukrainian government has not yet adequately replied to Russia’s invasion by declaring war against Russia and expelling and arresting its diplomats in Ukraine, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its Permanent Mission of Ukraine to the UN have been doing what they can to mobilize global support for Ukraine and keep Russian feet to the coals until Moscow withdraws its military from all occupied regions of Ukraine.

The Permanent Mission, on December 14, 2016, the 42^nd anniversary of the adoption of the UN General Assembly Resolution on the definition of aggression, reminded UN member-states of Russia’s unending belligerence.

“Having illegally occupied the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol and carried out further military intervention in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, the Russian Federation initiated an unprovoked military aggression against Ukraine. The Russian Federation thus has blatantly violated its international obligations and commitments as envisaged by the UN Charter, the 1975 CSCE Helsinki Final Act, the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, and the 1997 Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation.”

Furthermore, the Ukrainian diplomats stated that Russia has not only violated the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of Ukraine – which is a significant global crime in itself, Moscow “has threatened international peace and security at large. The third year of Russia’s military aggression continues to bring pain and suffering to the people of Ukraine of all ethnic backgrounds. The total number of victims of this undeclared war in the heart of Europe exceeds 10,000.”

The Kremlin’s crimes enumerated by Ukraine at the UN are severe enough to elicit global condemnation of Russia and its leadership as well as sanctions that would ban it from the global table and isolate it from all partnerships. It is the height of folly to invite Russia, a global lawbreaker, to partner in anti-ISIS coalitions.

Ukraine’s statement noted that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs “continues to affirm, in clear and unequivocal terms, that the occupation and subsequent attempt to annex the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, as well as Russia’s illegal actions in eastern Ukraine, fall squarely under the United Nations’ definition of an act of aggression.

“Such actions constitute the most serious crime against international peace, which entails international responsibility of the Russian Federation as a state and international criminal responsibility of its senior leadership,” the Permanent Mission declared.

Indeed, while many people of goodwill belittle the goings on of the UN, nonetheless, the respected global body has a definition of aggression, which Russia has violated. And this is in addition to the UN’s official condemnation of Russia, a member of the UN Security Council, as an “occupier” of foreign lands just like Nazi Germany and other tyrannical empires were. (Read my previous blog of December 20, 2016.)

The Ukrainian statement also said the political and military leaderships of Russia bear full responsibility for the planning, preparation, initiation and waging of this aggression, “as well as responsibility for numerous human casualties, material damage and destruction.”

Indeed, Russian war reparations are well within the bounds of reasonable Ukrainian demands after Russians withdraw back to its country.

“No political, economic or military considerations can justify the treacherous Russian aggression against Ukraine. War cannot be a means of doing politics in the twenty-first century,” the statement went on to say.

The Ukrainian delegation expressed its gratefulness to the member-states of the United Nations, notably the United States, Great Britain and Canada, for their “consistent and strong support in countering Russian aggression and overcoming its consequences.”

Ukraine also called for increasing international pressure on Russia in order to stop the aggression and bring about complete withdrawal from the territory of Ukraine of “the Russian armed forces, Russia-controlled illegal armed groups and mercenaries, along with weapons and military equipment deployed in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine) or illegally transferred to the terrorist organizations "DNR" and "LNR", as well as to revoke all acts aimed at legitimizing the attempted annexation of the Crimean peninsula and to undertake its further de-occupation.”

“Only Ukraine’s full control over the entire length of its state border and firm guarantees of its sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence can safeguard international peace and security,” the statement concluded.

This is also the only way that the borders of the former captive nations, Europe, Canada and the United States can be secured in the face of expanding Russian threats.

The free world is maintaining sanctions against Moscow amid calls for new sanctions but Russia is not budging. In addition to ongoing transgressions against the Minsk Accords, Russia has even violated a three-day Christmas truce by escalating attacks against Ukrainian positions.

According to a report on December 27 by Col. Oleksandr Motuzyanyk, Ministry of Defense spokesperson, “The past 24 hours have shown that the adversary is not going to respect agreements on complete and comprehensive ceasefire. Since December 24, militants have continued firing on Ukrainian positions.”

Two days later at the Ukrainian Crisis Media Center, Motuzyanyk said hostilities intensified in the vicinity of Krymske in the Luhansk region. “The most active combat actions took place in far outskirts of Krymske. The enemy fired on our positions three times from weapons of armored fighting vehicles and machine guns. One armed provocation, involving the use of grenade launchers, took place in Krymske,” he said.

The Russia-backed terrorists also violated the ceasefire in Stanytsia Luhanska and to the north from Stanytsia Luhanska. All told, they violated the ceasefire six times in the Luhansk sector.

Russian mercenaries are also pulling up heavy arms. They deployed the Grad multiple-launch missile systems (truck-mounted 122 mm multiple rocket launcher) near the so-called Svitlodarsk rim at the Donbas frontline, reported UNIAN. 

“The Svitlodarsk rim remains to be a zone with never-ending shelling against our positions, and they increase and decrease in number ever and again," ATO spokesperson Col. Andriy Lysenko said.

The ceasefire in eastern Ukraine that was supposed to go into effect during this holiday season has failed, and the Ukrainian military said they are not the reason for its failure.

Motuzyanyk said Russian-backed terrorists continue to violate ceasefire in the ATO zone.

“The past 24 hours proved that the enemy does not comply with the agreements reached previously on the full and comprehensive ceasefire, starting December 24. The enemy continues to shell Ukrainian positions, which have traditionally been the hottest spots in the past weeks,” said Motuzyanyk.

“As we've been reporting, the newest ceasefire, which was supposed to go into effect on December 24, never took hold. Though fighting has been less intense this week than last, there have been significant casualties.”

By mid-February 2017, Russia will be waging war against Ukraine for three full years. Will there continue to be no end in sight? If the free world continues to interact with Russia on many levels as if nothing is happening and refrain from designating it as a pariah, criminal state, then the Russian war and Russia’s acts of terrorism will continue.

If Ukraine refuses to declare war against Russia and sever diplomatic relations with it, the free world will continue to be confused by Ukraine’s response to Russia’s aggression and the war and acts of terrorism will continue across the country.

The free nations’ 2017 New Year’s resolution must be to bring this to the attention of world leaders in order to end Russia’s criminal bloodletting in Ukraine.

UN Labels Russia ‘Occupier’ for All Generations to Know

The United Nations has officially condemned Russia, a member of the UN Security Council, as an “occupier” of foreign lands just like Nazi Germany and other tyrannical empires were.

What is significant about this resolution is that while Ukraine, the United States and a few other countries favorably inclined toward Ukraine have condemned Russia for its illegal annexation of Crimea, a resolution by the UN, a global representative body, casts a different light on this crime. Just like the albatross in “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner,” Russia, the Kremlin and Vladimir Putin have been publically stigmatized as global lawbreakers for current and future generations to see.

The international community must also appreciate that an occupier is a state that has crossed international frontiers without consideration of laws, or invaded a foreign land, and has willfully taken what it wanted.

This resolution sends a clear message to Russia and Putin that as “occupying authorities” they are responsible for the persecutions and violations of the human rights of the residents of Crimea and will be brought to justice.

The 71st General Assembly adopted on Monday, December 19, a resolution on human rights in Crimea, titled “Situation of human rights in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine),” which was initiated by Ukraine and supported by the UNGA Third Committee. Seventy-three UN member-states, including Ukraine, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and others backed the document, 76 abstained, and Russia plus 22 others voted against it.

The resolution cited the word “occupier” in relation to Russia’s enslavement of Crimea four times.

Most importantly, the resolution condemns “the temporary occupation of part of the territory of Ukraine —the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (hereinafter “Crimea”) — by the Russian Federation.” It also notably reaffirmed its “non-recognition” of Russia’s unlawful annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea after a fabricated and rigged referendum.

The General Assembly called on the Russia “to take all measures necessary to bring an immediate end to all abuses against residents of Crimea, in particular reported discriminatory measures and practices, arbitrary detentions, torture and other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment, and to revoke all discriminatory legislation.”

It also urged Russia to “immediately release Ukrainian citizens who were unlawfully detained and judged without regard for elementary standards of justice, as well as those transferred across internationally recognized borders from Crimea to the Russian Federation.”

Russia must also “address the issue of impunity and ensure that those found to be responsible for abuses are held accountable before an independent judiciary.”

The world body insisted that the Russian occupying authorities “create and maintain a safe and enabling environment for journalists and human rights defenders to perform their work independently and without undue interference in Crimea; to permit the reopening of cultural and religious institutions.”

Coming at the end of the year, the UN vote capped an intense campaign by Ukraine and global organizations, including Amnesty International and other organizations, to shed light on Russia’s occupation of Crimea and violation of human rights. See my blog post “Russian Oppression in Occupied Crimea Takes Center Stage” of November 15.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine welcomed the resolution, pointing out that this important document provides a clear definition on the status of Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol as part of the territory of Ukraine, condemns the temporary occupation of Crimea by the Russian Federation and does not recognize its attempted annexation by the occupying state.

“That’s why the fixation and condemnation by UN resolution of the systematic human rights violations carried out by the Russian occupation authorities, including extrajudicial executions, abductions, politically motivated persecution and restriction of basic political rights of Crimean residents should become an important step towards defending rights and civil liberties of citizens of Ukraine that live under this occupation.”

The ministry said one of the key elements of the resolution is the call to ensure the unimpeded access of international human rights monitoring mechanisms to enslaved Crimea to monitor and report on the situation according to their mandates. Within the context of the terrible human rights situation in Crimea due to its occupation by Russia, it attached particular importance to the reference in the resolution to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, which underscores the humane treatment of the population, which lives in occupied territory and the need to protect its rights under international humanitarian law.

With this document in its folder, Ukraine, its allies and civic organizations around the world can appeal to individual member-states to condemn Russia’s enslavement of Crimea and to continue sanctions against Moscow until Russia withdraws all of its armed forces from Crimea and Ukraine. That should be the free world’s New Year resolution.

Senators Urge Trump to Give Ukraine Lethal Weapons

A bipartisan group of US senators wrote to President-elect Donald Trump on Thursday, December 8, urging him to continue America’s strong support for Ukraine during Russia’s war against it.

The 27 legislators’ letter turned out to be a succinct primer on US-Ukraine relations ahead of the third anniversary of Russia’s aggression in Crimea and eastern Ukraine.

The letter listed the following reasons for the senators’ urgent appeal to Trump:

1. Russia’s enduring illegal annexation of Crimea and military aggression in eastern Ukraine;

2. The Kremlin’s daily ceasefire violations that make a mockery of the Minsk Agreement;

3. Russia’s escalation that demonstrates that this conflict in the heart of Europe is far from over;

4. Russia has yet to withdraw its heavy weapons and continues its sabotage and subversion efforts;

5. Moscow has not halted its disinformation war against Ukraine and the West;

6. Russia has not stopped its economic and political pressure aimed at undermining the Ukrainian government; and

7. According to the UN, approximately 10,000 people have been killed, more than 20,000 wounded, and more than 2 million internally displaced since the conflict began.

“In light of Russia’s continued aggression and repeated refusal to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereign right to choose its own destiny, we also renew our call for the United States to increase political, economic, and military support for Ukraine.  This includes defensive lethal assistance as part of a broader effort to help Ukrainians better defend themselves, deter future aggression, and implement key structural reforms,” they wrote.

The senators expressed their belief that Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea should never be accepted, and the US should not lift sanctions imposed on Russia for its actions in eastern Ukraine until key provisions of the Minsk Agreement are met.

“Accordingly, US leadership on maintaining such transatlantic sanctions should remain a priority,” they wrote.

Russia invaded the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea in February 2014, about a week after the conclusion of the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, and simultaneously with Viktor Yanukovych’s flight from Ukraine at the end of the historic Revolution of Dignity.

The lawmaker’s appeal to the President-elect is also timely because Trump has not expressed a word of support for Ukraine while favoring Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin. In July 2016, Trump said he “would be looking into” whether to officially recognize Crimea as part of Russia. The following month he said that Putin is “not going to go into Ukraine,” despite the fact that Russia already had invaded Ukraine.

Stating that Russia’s military land-grab in Ukraine is unprecedented in modern European history, the senators said these “actions in Crimea and other areas of eastern Ukraine dangerously upend well-established diplomatic, legal, and security norms that the United States and its NATO allies painstakingly built over decades – a historically bipartisan global security framework that has greatly served US security and economic interests.”

They drew a straight line between Russia’s war in Ukraine and US security by pointing out that it is in America’s “vital national security interest to uphold these norms and values, and prevent America’s commitment to its allies and ideals from being called into question.”

The legislators concluded their letter by expressing hope for the continuation of the US “tradition of bipartisan support for Ukraine in Congress, which has authorized meaningful assistance programs through the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, and other pieces of legislation.”

The following senators signed the letter: Robert Portman, Richard J. Durbin, John McCain, Jeanne Shaheen, Marco Rubio, Sherrod Brown, Ron Johnson, Christopher S. Murphy, Cory Gardner, Richard Blumenthal, Pat Roberts, Jack Reed, Christopher A. Coons, John Barrasso, Benjamin L. Cardin, Lindsey Graham, Robert P. Casey Jr., John Boozman, Gary C. Peters, Jim Risch, Jeff Merkley, Johnny Isakson, Kirsten Gillibrand, James Inhofe, Amy Klobuchar, Sheldon Whitehouse and Robert Menendez.

Hopefully, members of the House of Representatives will soon compose similar entreaty to the President-elect.

The letter to Trump came a day after NATO urged the free to continue diplomatic pressure and sanctions against Russia until Moscow respects the truce that it signed.

After talks with NATO and Ukraine foreign ministers, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told reporters Wednesday of a “massive increase in cease-fire violations” in the conflict-torn east Ukraine. He said hundreds of explosions are sometimes reported daily, including many caused by heavy weapons banned under the Minsk peace accords.

“The international community must keep pressuring Russia to respect its obligations, especially while the security situation in eastern Ukraine remains so serious,” Stoltenberg said.

The NATO official continued “I call on all parties to redouble their efforts to implement the Minsk Agreements in full. As a first step, we need to see an immediate and full ceasefire. In the meantime, the international community must keep pressuring Russia to respect its obligations. Especially while the security situation in eastern Ukraine remains so serious, it is important that economic sanctions be maintained.”

“Russia has a significant responsibility in bringing the conflict to an end,” Stoltenberg added.

NATO and free world support for Ukraine is welcome and necessary but it will remain lukewarm without the political and moral backing of the United States.

Ukraine Defends National Interests at the UN

Ukraine continues its undaunted diplomatic battle in the hallowed halls of the United Nations to defend its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, safeguard the fate of Ukrainian citizens, protect human rights, and condemn numerous Russian gross violations of the UN Charter and international law and order. Ukraine is steadfastly supported in this mission by Ambassador Samantha Power, US permanent representative to the UN, and several other member-states.

Ambassador Volodymyr Yelchenko, permanent representative of Ukraine to the UN, on November 22 enlightened the world body about why Moscow is depriving the residents of enslaved Crimea of a valuable life-giving commodity, one that is protected by numerous UN resolutions as well as Goal 6 of the Sustainable Development Goals – water.

Yelchenko first of all reminded the UN member-states that Russia invaded the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea in February 2014 and has occupied and enslaved it ever since, incidentally as well as two eastern oblasts of Ukraine.

“The territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea as of today remains under occupation of the Russian Federation and under international law it is the occupying power that bears full responsibility for the consequences of its illegal actions,” the Ukrainian diplomat noted.

He explained that the Russian delegation in an earlier statement had demonstrated the inability of the Russian occupation authorities “to address in any satisfactory manner the essential needs of the local population.” Instead of admitting its unlawful actions and attempting to correct the wrongs it committed, Yelchenko continued, “The Russian side opted to use the issue of water supply in Crimea as a propaganda tool.”

Today Moscow is using water as a weapon of control, while in 1932-33 the Russian Federation’s Soviet predecessors used food as a weapon of control that killed some 7-10 million Ukrainians.

Yelchenko challenged the sincerity of the Russian occupiers by saying if Moscow was genuinely concerned about the issue of water, it should cease diverting scarce water resources in Crimea to supply the needs of the growing military infrastructure and military personnel on the peninsula.

Ukraine and other global military observers have reported on numerous occasions Russia’s massive military buildup on Crimea, turning the once popular resort to a dangerous, armed warm water encampment with enough troops, sailors and weapons to strike targets in the Black Sea, the Med and even Atlantic.

Once Russia stops misappropriating water for military purposes, Yelchenko concluded, “The next logical step would be to start the process of de-occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and city of Sevastopol, thus contributing in a positive way to addressing the issue of water availability in Crimea.”

A day earlier, the Ukrainian ambassador explained to the UN General Assembly that the so-called Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) is a bogus institution and Kyiv will not support any UN measure that would give the CIS credibility.

The CIS is an ill-conceived structure formed 25 years ago, when Ukraine declared its independence and the USSR was crumbling, in order to hasten Ukraine’s push for independence and sovereignty. However, in reality, it is merely another façade to promote the Russian empire.

Yelchenko presented Ukraine’s case why the UN cannot and should not cooperate with the CIS.

“To our disappointment this organization demonstrated its complete failure to take appropriate measures to respond to the Russian aggression in Ukraine. The CIS is still pretending that there is no Russian aggression, no illegal occupation of Crimea, no war crimes committed by the Russian Federation,” he said.

The Ukrainian ambassador pointed out that Ukraine declined to sign the decision of the Council of Heads of State of the CIS of December 24, 1993, regarding measures to ensure international recognition of the CIS, with regard to granting observer status for the CIS in the General Assembly. He said Ukraine acted on the basis of the Statement of December 20, 1991, of Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada concerning the conclusion of the Agreement on the CIS, which stated that Ukraine refused to grant the CIS the status of a subject of international law.

He said the CIS is not subject of international law but rather it’s an international, interregional formation which not only lacks definite status but actually includes a military and political alliance established on the basis of the Tashkent agreement on collective security of May 15, 1992, which binds only some members of the Commonwealth.

The CIS was entrusted with strengthening regional cooperation in such areas as trade and economic development while its principal sponsor, Russia, has undertaken targeted illegal and discriminative steps on trade with Ukraine, Yelchenko continued.

The CIS was also mandated to combat terrorism and manifestations of extremism but it has also failed in that respect, he said.

“We express our disappointment that although the Commonwealth positions itself as an active fighter against terrorism and extremism, it has displayed itself with the total absence of response to the actions of one of its most influential members — the Russian Federation — an aggressor and occupier country, which controls, finances and directs the actions of illegal armed groups in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine, supplying them military equipment and weapons and constitutes a serious threat to international peace and security,” the Ukrainian official said.

Yelchenko said Ukraine’s abstention from putting to a vote draft resolution A/71/L.5 was based on the understanding that its adoption should not be interpreted as de jure recognition of the CIS as a regional arrangement, as defined in Chapter VIII of the United Nations Charter.

Ukraine’s position on the CIS was spot-on. There is no reason for Russia to have another fake, hollow institution perpetuating its lies and fabrications in the United Nations.

The 71st UN General Assembly and the GA President Peter Thomson should not ridicule themselves by bowing to Russian pressure and endorsing the CIS as a subject of international law.