Russian Threats must not be Met with Ukrainian Silence

Russia’s brutal threats against Ukraine are as regular as sunrises. And, sadly, so is Ukraine’s official silence.

In my previous blogpost, I observed that President Zelenskyy, when his country faces a barrage of offensive ultimatums and coercion by Russian officials, does not have enough national courage, spirit and right stuff to reply in kind to Putin. He is incapable of declaring that Kyiv will no longer endure Russian threats, assaults and killings, and Russia will face the same consequences as it promises Ukraine if it doesn’t immediately cease and desist.

Since then, on March 28, a Russian official voiced the Kremlin’s latest warning about Ukraine’s perceived non-compliance with Moscow’s demands. Russian news sources quoted the official as cautioning that if Kyiv tries to amend the Minsk accords, Ukraine will face “irreparable consequences.”

“Any attempts by Kyiv to change the Minsk agreements, including changing the order of steps to be implemented, can lead to irreparable consequences,” the representative of Russia in the Trilateral Contact Group on Donbass (TCG) Boris Gryzlov said.

Furthermore, the Russian representative made it clear that control over the Russian-Ukrainian border before the elections in the territories, which Russia claims are not controlled by Ukraine, will not be granted to Kyiv. For the Ukrainian authorities to gain control over the border, Gryzlov stated, it is necessary to grant Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics special status, declare amnesty, and hold elections.

“Given the statements of both Ukrainian nationalists (sic) and a number of Kyiv officials about their plans to ‘cleanse’ the recalcitrant territories, such Kyiv control is a threat of genocide against the residents of the Donbas,” Gryzlov added.

It is inconceivable that the perpetrator of the crime of invading a peaceful neighbor is making further threats against the victim.

The Russian’s threat of “irreparable consequences” was met with silence from Kyiv. Irreparable consequences means that whatever actions Russia decides to undertake against Ukraine in order to punish it for not succumbing to its plans will not be reversible. They will be permanent. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014 was not beyond the realm of possibilities just as Moscow’s scorched-earth incursion across Ukraine up to the Polish border could be deemed probable. Moscow has demonstrated that it has the will, ability and temerity to completely fulfill its threats against Ukraine with impunity.

Kyiv’s hopefully self-respecting leadership cannot sit by idly while a foreign power, Ukraine’s greatest enemy, Russia continues to threaten the nation with total subjugation or annihilation. But apparently the government in Kyiv can rest on its laurels as President Zelenskyy persists in placing his faith in face-to-face talks with Putin.

In my earlier blogpost I quoted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s comeback to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s threat of destroying Israel. Tel Aviv’s leaders are valiantly not shy about replying harshly to their enemies’ threats.

Responding to Ali Khamenei’s harsh anti-Israeli rhetoric, Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz vehemently warned the Islamic Republic against “testing” Israel’s readiness to respond to threats. 

“In my experience, the arrogant verbiage of our enemies hides weakness, yet we shall be ready for any threat, by any means,” Gantz wrote on his Facebook account. “I’m more than familiar with the Iranian issue and, having prepared the IDF’s operational capabilities, I strongly advise against trying to test them,” he added.

Gantz and Netanyahu echoed each other’s thoughts: “We will always thwart murderous designs against us. We will attack those who attack us. We will launch preemptive strikes against those who plan to attack us. Those who threaten us with extinction put themselves in similar danger.”

This type of dialogue might seem to be a schoolyard quarrel about whose belt is longer but in the eyeball-to-eyeball world of diplomacy and military aggression, it does signal a fearless riposte and intent. Moscow has forewarned Ukraine about its intentions so Kyiv must be forearmed with a credible rejoinder.

This is the national attitude that President Zelenskyy should exude when replying to Moscow’s threats, especially when Russian troops are on Ukraine’s black soil, killing Ukrainians and apparently making plans to advance to the west as far as they can.

Ukrainians, certainly more than other people, hope and pray for a quick conclusion to Russia’s six-year war against Ukraine. However, silence and cowering will not protect present and future Ukrainian generations from Russian aggression. Neither will agreements, accords and ceasefires.

Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower’s words in the historical drama “The Countdown to D-Day” are poignantly appropriate for today’s real-life Ukraine: “But if they do not offer the sacrifice in blood now, we will all pay dearly with added gallons later. So if some must die, it is in a worthy cause.”

Benefit of Being Perfectly Clear

While surprise or sneak attacks serve a purpose as Pearl Harbor demonstrated, strategies, tactics and responses that are forthright, blunt and clear also help in attaining a goal.

In some instances, truthfulness may even subdue, pacify or deter the enemy to such a degree that he will sheath his sword and retreat to his sanctuary. Thus you achieve a victory over your enemy without firing a shot.

Sun Tzu taught that a smart commander should anticipate an enemy’s decisions before launching or directing a war and he should never act rashly. The Chinese military leader and theoretician also expressed the belief that “to subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence of a war. This is to say, we should use comprehensive means – including political, diplomatic, economic, and technical resources instead of purely military means—to subdue the enemy.”

Occasionally, if the commander is clever, upfront and credible enough he should or could scare the wits out of the enemy by mere words alone.

In Ukrainian history, it has been recorded that the Grand Prince Sviatoslav Khorobryi (Sviatoslav the Brave 942-972) of Kyiv-Rus, Ukraine’s ancient precursor, would warn his enemies with the simple phrase “I am advancing toward you” (Іду на Ви) before vanquishing them. He chose not to hide behind complicated strategies or tactics but rather engage his enemies forthrightly.

Replies to verbal threats should also be straightforward and unambiguous since they could convince your adversary of the commitment and strength behind your words and the determination to fulfill them.

Earlier this week I read on the website of the Israeli i24 news network how plainly, graphically yet firmly Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Iranian leaders of the fate that would await them if they threaten Israel with destruction.

The war of words between Israel and Iran intensified by several degrees this week as Israel responded to Iran’s latest threats of annihilation with its own expected and noble message of destruction.

Netanyahu warned Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that it was not wise to threaten the Jewish state in such a manner. In his response, the premier highlighted that threatening Israel with a “Final Solution, brought to mind the Nazi Final Solution plan to annihilate the Jewish people.”

Netanyahu’s reply was in response to a bombardment of tweets from Khamenei’s English-language Twitter page, in which he railed against Israel, including showing a poster that read, “Palestine will be free. The final solution. Resistance is referendum.[sic]” The poster depicted Palestinian, Hezbollah and Hamas flags flying above or around Al-Aqsa mosque and Dome of the Rock shrine, as well as a large portrait of slain Islamic Republican Guards Corps General Qassem Soleimani.

Middle East insiders observed that the Iranian leader was characteristically blunt in other parts of his Twitter attack. Calling the “Zionist regime the most evident example of state terrorism,” he added that “they have been acting like a cancerous tumor, furthering their goals by massacring children, women and men.”

Israel has historically never backed away from defending politically and militarily its nation and sovereign land. As a matter of fact, Israel claims as its moral and inherent right to defend its citizens from attacks and threats to their existence. Furthermore, no one should expect Israel (the country) or the Israeli people to negotiate with or capitulate to terrorist organizations whose cause is its destruction.

Israel has laid out its righteous policy of responding to real or veiled threats while Netanyahu tersely declared what will happen to the misguided country that seeks to fulfill its threat.

In his Twitter retort, Netanyahu declared: “Khamenei’s threats to carry out ‘The Final Solution’ against Israel bring to mind the Nazi ‘Final Solution’ plan to annihilate the Jewish people. He should know that any regime that threatens the destruction of the State of Israel faces a similar danger.”

Consequently, there’s no chance of a misunderstanding. No one is left wondering what will happen. Similarity will occur.

This policy sends a clear message to your nation and citizens. It sends a clear message to your allies who will know how far you are willing to tolerate threats. And it sends a clear message to the adversary or enemy about what will happen to them if they persist with their threats or, God forbid, carry them out.

No misunderstandings. No ambiguities. No apologies. The line in the sand is visible. Fulfill your threat and you will also face the same consequences.

Ukraine has faced the same amount of intense threats from its age-old arch-enemy Russia as Israel has faced from its Islamic neighbors. Ukraine and Israel have had to contend with invasions and killings, and have had to defend their nations and sovereign countries form attacks.

While in Ukraine, the Armed Forces, National Guard, volunteer units, and Ministries of Defense and Foreign Affairs understand their mission when faced with verbal or real attacks from Russia, President Zelenskyy does not seem to share their national courage and spirit enough to tell Russia and Putin how long will Ukraine endure Russian threats, assaults and killings, and what Russia will face if it doesn’t immediately cease and desist.

He should read Winston Churchill’s eloquent and powerful speech in the British House of Commons on June 4, 1940: “We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.”

Zelenskyy adaptation of these would be the line in the sand and a public warning to Moscow and the global community.

Two Kyiv Appeals to Free World You may Have Overlooked

Amid global distractions from critical issues pertaining to Ukrainian survival, two Kyiv government departments issued stark reminders to the world that Ukraine continues to face every day deadly threats at the hands of Russia.

The Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada – its parliament that is dominated by President Zelenskyy’s Servant of the People party – adopted on April 30 a resolution addressed to legislative bodies around the world jogging their memories about Russia’s six-year war against Ukraine – Europe’s first major war in decades. Three hundred and nine legislators voted for the statement which also asked the international community to condemn Russian aggression, according to parliamentary documents and media reports.

“The Verkhovna Rada calls on the parliaments of foreign states and parliamentary assemblies of international organizations to condemn the actions of the Russian Federation against the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, as such that contradict the generally recognized principles and norms of international law, to increase political, diplomatic and sanction pressure on the state-occupant  until the complete cessation of armed aggression and the restoration of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized national borders,” reads the document.

In addition, the resolution formally called “On the appeal of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine to the parliaments of foreign states and parliamentary assemblies of international organizations to condemn the continued armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, the illegal annexation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, and the occupation of certain areas of Donetsk and Luhansk regions, political repressions of citizens of Ukraine and release of political prisoners – citizens of Ukraine” (No.3068), called on world parliaments to maintain non-recognition of Russia’s armed annexation of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol and to condemn the Russian occupiers’ violation of fundamental human rights and freedoms in the temporarily occupied territories.

The Verkhovna Rada urged parliaments and parliamentary assemblies to use all possible international political-diplomatic and sanction mechanisms to force Russia to immediately release all persons captured during the ongoing Russian war against Ukraine, as well as all other Ukrainian citizens illegally detained by Moscow in the temporarily occupied territories of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, Sevastopol, certain areas of Donetsk and Luhansk regions and in the Russia.

Addressing the Kremlin, Ukrainian parliamentarians demanded that Russia refrain from aggressive actions in the Black Sea region, blocking commercial navigation in some areas in the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov under a pretext of military exercises, blocking Ukrainian ports using hybrid methods, and to follow all norms and provisions of international maritime law.

The lawmakers insisted that Russia lift the ban on the activities of the Mejlis (the executive-representative body) of the Crimean Tatar People, and provide access to education in Ukrainian, and condemned Russian persecution of individuals for expressing their views, opinions, conscience and religion, participate in peaceful meetings, associations, and demand the free development of traditions and cultural identity in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine.

Furthermore they demanded that Russia stop the deportation of civilians in the temporarily occupied Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, as well as movement of Russian citizens to the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, which leads to a change in the demographic composition of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol.

The Verkhovna Rada also called on foreign legislatures to condemn the illegal construction by Russia of a bridge across the Kerch Strait and calls on it to provide full access for international human rights organizations to the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine to monitor human rights.

None of the issues raised in this resolution are new to Ukrainian watchers so their reiteration by lawmaking bodies such as the US Congress would not only be morally justified but also a resounding sign of solidarity with Ukraine in its time of need. It would also be a hot poker in Russia’s eye.

Odesa Battle

The second matter pertains to a Russian-instigated insurrection in the southern Ukrainian city of Odesa on May 2, 2014, in the first months of Moscow’s war against Ukraine, after Crimea was seized and battles began raging in Donbas. A Ukrainian loss in Odesa then could have constituted the opening of another deadly front for Russia’s invading armies.

Despite Russian propaganda that blamed the incident and bloodshed on Ukrainian activists and halfhearted official interest in the uprising, according to the Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group (http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1588256904), a Council of Europe’s International Advisory Panel confirmed that the riot arose after a group of pro-Russian anti-Maidan activists from the recently formed (and seemingly Russian-funded) Odesskaya Druzhyna attacked a peaceful march for Ukrainian unity. The violence escalated, with weapons and firearms used by both sides, and spun out of control particularly after news of the first death – that of Ihor Ivanov, a Maidan activist.  Six people were killed, four of them anti-Maidan activists.

Pro-unity activists then moved to Kulikovo Pole Square with the intention to destroy an anti-Maidan tent camp, where they were shot at by pro-Russian activists from inside and on the roof of the Trade Unions building.

Evidence is still being collected that is building a strong case against perpetrators from the pro-Russian, anti-Maidan cabal. It is also not presenting local officials in a favorable pro-Ukrainian light.

Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs yesterday, May 3, expressed its warranted sympathy for the deceased while condemning Russia for provoking the bloody skirmish on Ukrainian territory. The Ministry said:

“On this sorrowful day, when we mark six years since the tragic events in Odesa, the MFA of Ukraine deplores the hypocrisy of the Russian propaganda that continues exploiting this tragedy to incite hostility and hatred.

“The events in Odesa on May 2, 2014, became another element in a chain of provocations that the Russian Federation resorted to in pursuit of its failed project of ‘Novorossiya,’ aimed at destabilizing Ukraine’s East and South as well as disintegrating Ukraine. 

“Extremist forces in Odesa followed the same scenario masterminded earlier by Russia in Donbas – they proclaimed a fake ‘people’s republic,’ initiated violent riots with the use of arms and support by militants from outside, intimidated local activists, tried to paralyze local authorities and security forces.       

“The 2nd of May had to become a decisive day for the implementation of these plans. The attack of armed extremists under Russian flags against a peaceful rally supporting the unity of Ukraine triggered further events and led to first casualties. It speaks volumes that in its statements on the matter, the Russian side has never mentioned bloody events in the city center, which preceded the fire in the Trade Unions House. Russia has also been silent about the established facts of ignitions inside the Trade Unions House, as well as about pro-unity activists rescuing people trapped in the burning Trade Unions House.  

“Ukrainian law enforcement agencies do their best to identify the perpetrators and bring them to justice. As a result of criminal investigations of the events in Odesa on May 2, 2014, 37 charging documents were filed with the court. Three individuals were convicted. The State Investigations Bureau carries out a separate pre-trial investigation under criminal proceedings on a suspected involvement of Russian secret services in the organization of violent riots in Odesa.   

“Russia seems to be the only party not interested in establishing the true picture of tragic events in Odesa or the causes of the tragedy. Not only did Moscow cover up Dmytro Fuchedzhy, former deputy chief of the Head Office of the Ministry of Interior in Odesa region and one of the main suspects of the investigation, but reportedly granted him Russian citizenship and refused Ukraine's bid for his extradition under this pretext.”

“Moreover, during the negotiations on the mutual release of detained persons in September-December 2019, Russia insisted that Ukraine hand over at least nine individuals, who were direct or indirect organizers and participants of the violent riots in Odesa under Russian flags.

“We call on the international community to intensify common efforts to counter Russian propaganda and disinformation, which are significant elements of the Russian aggression and destabilizing activities against Ukraine and other democratic states.”

While fortunately Odesa was rescued and pro-Russian extremists repelled, the war goes on. Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine Dmytro Kuleba has rejected the possibility of direct dialogue with pro-Russian militants in occupied Donbas promoted by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the Normandy format ministerial video conference. The Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine continues to uncover more and more evidence of the Russian military presence in Ukraine.

Ukrainian soldiers are singlehandedly fighting and shedding their blood in defense of Ukraine and the nation as well as in a larger picture Europe all the way to the Atlantic. The free world must take notice of this or be prepared to summon Ukrainian servicemen and women to save it from Russian aggression.

Rising Tide for x-Captive Nations Own Security Bloc

One of the most vital contemporary security issues is the ongoing hostile global threat posed by Russia and its six-year war against Ukraine.

While most of the free world displays varying degrees of interest and support for Ukraine, the countries of Eastern Europe, the former captive nations of the Russian prison nations, maintain a unified position about the individual and collective danger of living on the border with Russia. They understand that by reason of geography and Russia’s insatiable imperial appetite they are in daily jeopardy.

Furthermore, these countries’ leaders use every occasion to tell the world that the fate that has befallen Ukraine awaits other countries across Eastern Europe and beyond. The x-captive nations urge the West to stand up to Russia over its invasion of Ukraine or else Europe could descend into a major war for the first time since the end of World War II in May 1945.

There is no specific evidence that Russia is moving its armed divisions up to the borders with the captive nations even though the lack of movement is really no relief because, for example, its invasion and occupation of Crimea in 2014 was not surreptitious. Furthermore, bullets and bayonets are not the only weapons in Russia’s arsenal. Moscow also takes advantage of psychological warfare, propaganda and cyberattacks in spreading its tentacles around the world.

With the Russian invasion of Ukraine vividly imprinted in the minds of the former captive nations, they recognize that the main security challenges of the region are related to the increasing military capabilities of the Russia and various military provocations, as detailed in an annual report by Latvian Foreign Affairs Minister Edgars Rinkēvičs about accomplishments and planned activities in its foreign policy and European affairs in 2019.

Lithuanian Minister of Foreign Affairs Linas Antanas Linkevičius, an outspoken critic of Russia, observed “It’s not just that we hear about threats but we testify them because they are real, they are not a big secret. Let’s remember the case of annexing the territory of Georgia, and recently they did so with the Crimea. We are asking ourselves how we can really resist it.

“If you are asking whether or not Russia is threatening our region, this is a different case. Lithuania is a member of NATO and the European Union, so there is no direct threat. However, there are insecurities in the region, and militaristic arguments are used in political debates. This is worrying and we have to understand it as a challenge and react.”

Linkevičius has pointed out that Russia’s threat, or hybrid war as he and others call it, is not only felt in his country but also everywhere around the world.

“It is not only present in the Eastern parts of Europe but also in the West. Inevitable are strategies used in war such as apply energy as a weapon, strategic communication, propaganda, cyberattacks. I think we should really take care of the threats and know how to resist them through best practices. We need to work closely so we cannot underestimate this threat,” he said.

Following a meeting in Russia about the status of temporarily occupied Crimea, Linkevičius had pointed out the comprehensive regional danger of Russia’s activities: “We can call them (Russia’s actions) as certain hybrid threats directed against us in the areas of energy and propaganda.”

Linkevičius correctly noted that Russia’s goal is to create the impression that the current state of regional and global affairs that demonstrate its stranglehold is in fact the “new normal” – so Moscow insists that the world accept it and move on.

“The legitimization of this ‘new normal’ by committing illegal actions in international law is one of the goals. Of course, dialogue and the impression of cooperation consolidate the position that everything is happening the way it should be, and that things are going the same way. We need to be cautious about that,” he said.

Linkevičius has consistently advocated a strong, united free world stance against Russian belligerence. He believes that every Russian threat and criminal action must be met with an equally strong response. For example, he said, Russian continues to violate the Minsk Accords, which are considered by some to be the last great hope for peace in Ukraine. “They (Russians) are testing their force again and look what the reaction will be. It comes alongside criticism of Ukraine that it fails to adhere to the Minsk Agreements, but, obviously, they themselves fail to do so,” Linkevičius said.

The countries of Eastern Europe and NATO cannot acknowledge Moscow’s diabolical plan and behave as it nothing is happening.

As for actual Russian threats on its border, a recent Lithuanian report indicated that Russia has based more tanks and bombers in the Kaliningrad enclave, which borders Lithuania and Poland, and upgraded its bases there to be able to deploy missiles including the nuclear-capable Iskander. The report also said there was a growing risk of “unintentional incidents” from increased military maneuvers on the other side of the Russian-Lithuanian border.

The Baltics, for one region, is also experiencing an uptick in hostile Russian propaganda which denies and twists real regional history. This fabrication mimics Russian lies in connection with the illegal invasion and annexation of Crimea in early 2014 and raises fears of an invasion of the Baltics.

There are Russian claims that Klaipėda, Lithuania’s third largest city, never belonged to Lithuania and that it was the gift of Stalin after World War II. This, Baltic officials say, parallels with Crimea’s seizure from Ukraine.

Minister of Defense of Lithuania Raimundas Karoblis and other military officials have told the British Guardian that they are taking very seriously the threat of disinformation campaigns orchestrated by Moscow that aim to destabilize the region.

“Russia is a threat,” Karoblis, said. “They are saying our capital Vilnius should not belong to Lithuania because between the first and second world wars it was occupied by Poland. It’s history of course, but Russia is using this pretext. Sometimes [the disinformation] is through [the government-run news agency] Sputnik, sometimes through their TV, but usually from politicians in the Duma.”

Karoblis declared this is a danger to the territorial integrity of Lithuania.

Lithuanians are officially warning their population of a genuine threat of invasion by Russia and were relieved when NATO dispatched 1,200 soldiers to the Baltic country.

Poland is also feeling this threat and is responding by creating a Territorial Defense Force to train thousands of volunteers for the kind of low-intensity hybrid warfare seen in eastern Ukraine, including cyber warfare. Also, some of the new volunteers will be assigned to protect Polish territory near Kaliningrad.

In response to calls for guidance from citizens fearing war, Lithuania’s Defense Ministry issued a civilian manual that includes information on survival skills and recognizing Russian weapons.

The best way to prevent war is to “demonstrate to the aggressor that we are ready to fight for our freedom, for every centimeter of our land,” former Defense Minister Juozas Olekas opined. “The capabilities, the readiness, this is the only way to stop Russian aggression in the region.”

The Baltic States have become concerned over the lack of defense from medium-range missiles, and Lithuania has taken the lead in attempting to address the gap. Vilnius has confirmed it is in talks to purchase new missile systems worth up to $110 million, amid concerns over potential aggression from Russia.

Comparing coronavirus threats with Russia, current Latvian Defense Minister Artis Pabriks said Russia is a greater danger. He said during the pandemic Russia has concentrated disinformation and propaganda attacks on Latvia and NATO. “They have become more concentrated, because Russia sees that the pandemic can be used in different ways,” the minister added.

Pabriks cautioned that the world’s biggest blunder will be underestimating Russia.

Nordic countries too share a border with Russia and according to the Baltic News Network that region admits that Russia has become the largest threat to Europe’s security. In a joint declaration, defense ministers of Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark and Iceland stated that Northern Europe must expect potential crises or incidents because of Russia.

“Russia’s leaders have shown that they are prepared to make practical and effective use of military means in order to reach their political goals, even when this involves violating principles of international law,” stated an announcement in Norwegian Aftenposten newspaper. “There is increasing military and intelligence activity in the Baltics and in our northern areas. The Russian military is challenging us along our borders and there have been several border infringements in the Baltics. Russia’s actions are the biggest challenge to the European security.”

This sentiment is echoed by Latvian Foreign Minister Edgars Rinkevics and the current Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda, who said Russia remains the key long-term threat to NATO, and the West’s passiveness on Russia’s military actions only encourages this country’s aggression. He paid attention to the fact that NATO’s presence in the Eastern flank is very modest compared with Russia’s aggressive military posture, especially taking into account the Kaliningrad region.

When – not if – Russia’s invasion of the Baltic States or Eastern Europe comes, it shouldn’t be a surprise. Moscow will be fulfilling its messianic vision of restoring its warped historical vision of being a great empire. It will rumble through the former captive nations like Hitler’s blitzkrieg did across Europe. Brazilian-born Latvian economist and CEO of the Latvian National Academy’s Security and Strategic Research Centre Jānis Bērziņš described this is a possible scenario, “Russia will not ask our Russians if they need protecting. It will simply come and will start protecting. But Russian military leaders do not think it is necessary to attack Latvia in a military fashion. Russia requires a buffer zone against NATO.”

Apparently Ukraine is the theater of operations for such a regional if not global war. Will Ukraine survive Russia’s invasion? Will the free world decide to defend Ukraine? Where will Europeans build the latter-day Maginot Line?

Polish professor, Przemyslaw Zhuravsky, and advisor to the Foreign Minister of Poland, believes the battle for freedom will go on as long as Russia poses a threat. “Until Russia abandons its imperial ambitions, we will have to fight it. This applies not only to Ukraine and Poland, but also to other countries bordering Russia. Russian imperialism has touched everyone – from Central Europe to the Caucasus and the Far East,” Zhuravsky said in a recent interview.

“We have new graves in Ukraine every day, we have them in Georgia and we can have them in any other place where Russia can destabilize. Since its inception, Russia - from the Moscow Principality - has been exporting destabilization to its neighbors. As long as this happens, joint action will be the best option. The peoples of our region are interested in the collapse of the Russian Empire. Others may negotiate with Russia, but we have nothing to talk about. Such a discussion would only boil down to the question of whether or not we exist.”

Fortunately, on the one hand, Zhuravsky had said earlier, the Ukrainian armed forces constitute a regional army to be reckoned with because of its battlefield experience. “The main priority of Polish foreign policy is to strengthen military security in the region in terms of Russian aggression, which continues to threaten Ukraine and other countries, and in a high state of combat readiness of Russian troops as a result of military exercises near the borders of NATO. In this situation, signing an agreement on cooperation in defense - a good step and complements the decisions taken at the Warsaw Summit concerning the strengthening of security in our region.

“Remember that the Ukrainian army – the only one in our region, which has a real combat experience in contact with the Russian army, familiar with the Russian way of doing hybrid war. It also has the technological experience gained on the battlefield that cannot be played back on the training ground, but only in a real war.”

However, unfortunately, he continued, “Ukrainians must remember that they are bordering on a bloodthirsty empire and cannot afford the mistakes that cost independence.”

Thus, regional unity and preparedness in the face of Russian aggression are the key to preserving the former captive nations’ individual independence and sovereignty and collective freedom.

Estonian Minister of Defense Juri Luik said NATO is an answer. “Russia has become a threat again, and the need for NATO is stronger than ever. This is the framework holding the European defense together – an agreement between states that allows us to continue pursuing our strategic goal despite the internal political flutters,” Luik said. 

Short of NATO’s visible muscle and the West’s tepid attitude, the former captive nations’ only salvation, as I have proposed on numerous occasions, is for them to form a regional mini-NATO, an updated Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations (ABN), that would noticeably promote and safeguard collective security against Russia.

Holocaust & Holodomor – Similar Conclusions

I came across an interesting article about the Holocaust in the April 20^th edition of the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. In it the reporter makes salient points that duplicate statements that Ukrainians make about the Holodomor – the murder by famine of at least 7 million Ukrainian men, women and children by the Russians in 1932-33.

For example:

“After reading hundreds of books and articles about the Holocaust, and even perusing many documents that have never been published as part of his work as the director of the Elie Wiesel Archive at Boston University, Rappel (Jewish archivist – ID) realized that despite the research controversy regarding the precise number of victims, ‘in our consciousness the number remains 6 million.’ …

“About 15 years later, during Eichmann’s trial, chief prosecutor Gideon Hausner said that ‘In the consciousness of the nation the number 6 million has become sanctified.’ But he added: ‘It’s not so simple to prove that. We did not use this number in any official document, but it became sanctified.’ Now, thanks to Rappel, historical research had added another layer for understanding the context for the number.”

Indeed the number of Holocaust victims became “sanctified” in Jewish and everyone’s minds. Regardless of what was, is or will be said, that’s the number of killed Jews. Question it and you become an evil denier. So why are we, Ukrainians, allowing a discussion about the number of Holodomor victims? Why are some Ukrainian and non-Ukrainians discounting the number of dead to a mere 4 million? My generation of baby boomers grew up with the figure of 7 million Ukrainian men, women and children starved to death by Russia in 1932-33 just because they were Ukrainian. That figure must be sanctified against all others in our and everyone’s minds.

Another dramatic point made in the story concerns the word “nation.” Many scholars, pundits, writers and readers identify nation as a country and vice versa, rarely stating or implying that a nation does not necessarily exist only within the boundaries of a country or state. Oftentimes a nation exists or has existed for hundreds and hundreds of years without the formal boundaries of a country.

The Haaretz story points out:  “‘Polish Jewry is extinct and no longer exists. Polish soil is a sacred grave of Polish and European Jewry. I could have brought you a sacred gift: a clod of earth from Polish soil suffused with the blood of a nation, which has died a martyr’s death,’ was how Unger began.”

The blood of a Jewish nation, which had lived in Europe not merely beyond the borders of a Jewish state, Israel, which didn’t yet exist during World War II.

The Haaretz reporter correctly used the word nation, meaning a group of people with a shared language, history, culture, religion, tradition and experience of persecution – just like the Ukrainian nation which lost 7 million people to forced famine created by Russia.

Former Captive Nations Constitute Strong Bloc

A recent draft report by the European Parliament is finally admitting the importance of laying the foundation of an alliance or bloc made up exclusively of the former captive nations – the now-independent nations of Eastern Europe that have experienced Russian invasions and enslavement.

I have been promoting such a concept in my The Torn Curtain 1991 blog for years.

This is an historic first step in the evolution of post-Soviet imperial political relations even though it doesn’t touch on the creation of an official, comprehensive coalition of these countries. It also doesn’t matter that the draft report focuses on a partnership of limited scope.

RFE/RL reported on April 15 that it has seen the draft report that says the European Parliament will call for the creation of a “common economic space” between the European Union and the six nations of its Eastern Partnership program as part of a process of “gradual integration” into the bloc.

In a significant move, one that should be duplicated by the entire free world, the parliamentary draft report also denounces Russia’s “illegal” actions in Eastern Partnership countries – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine – including what it calls destabilization, invasion and annexation.

The document is to be debated by the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee in the coming weeks and could potentially be endorsed by the full chamber in May, wrote RFE/RL’s Rikard Jozwiak.

A Brussels summit that was to bring together the leaders of the 27 EU member states with those of the six Eastern Partnership members was scheduled for June 18 but now might be postponed to the second half of the year due to the coronavirus pandemic.

Nonetheless, this development is significant in light of Russia’s ongoing verbal and military aggression not only in the region of the former captive nations but also in other regions as well as cyberspace. The parliamentary report publically admits that Russia continues to be a global threat and smaller or larger coalitions are wholly appropriate and even encouraged responses to its belligerence.

The RFE/RL story wrote that in a veiled reference to Russia, which has strongly opposed efforts by former captive nations to get closer to the EU and NATO, the European Parliament will “confirm the sovereign right of the Eastern partner countries to freely choose their individual level of cooperation or integration with the EU,” according to the draft report.

The document also “strongly condemns the continued violations of fundamental principles and norms of international law in the Eastern Partnership region,” citing “illegal use of force, invasion, destabilization, annexation, borderization, and occupation of territories of several Eastern Partnership countries by the Russian Federation.”

Proof of such a bloc’s necessity is Russia’s unbridled and unconcealed invasion of Ukraine six years ago and its subsequent occupation of Crimea and Donbas. Both Ukrainian regions have experienced typical Russian violations of human rights, arrests and killings. The war has resulted in death more than 13,000 Ukrainian civilians and soldiers and in excess of a million displaced Ukrainians.

The Eastern Partnership program was launched in 2009 and is meant to bring the six countries closer to the EU without clearly offering future membership. Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine have since signed association agreements with the EU, including free-trade deals, but several member states have been reluctant to discuss the issue of these countries’ eventual membership.

The European Parliament, which has in the past called for further enlargement to the east, noted in the draft report that “while accession is not foreseen under the framework of the Eastern Partnership, the Eastern Partnership policy can facilitate a process of gradual integration to the EU.”

Within this framework, there is a joint commitment to deliver tangible results for citizens across the region. In support of a more results-oriented approach towards the Eastern Partnership, the European Commission and European External Action Service identified 20 key deliverables for 2020. This ambitious work plan was endorsed at the Eastern Partnership Summit which took place in Brussels in November 2017. These commitments by the EU, its member-states and the six partner countries cover the four main priority areas of the Eastern Partnership:

·                     Stronger Economy (economic development and market opportunities);

·                     Stronger Governance (strengthening institutions and good governance);

·                     Stronger Connectivity (connectivity, energy efficiency, environment and climate change);

·                     Stronger Society (mobility and people-to-people contacts).

A structured engagement with a wider range of civil society organizations, advances gender equality and non-discrimination, as well as clearer and tailor-made strategic communications are also being pursued as across all areas.

Indeed this is a great beginning. For it to be better, the six partner countries must be expanded with the participation of at least Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland. Their cumulative gross domestic product is $936 billion, with Poland and Ukraine leading the list. A respectable sum. Aleksander Lukashenko, because of his subservience to the Kremlin, has seen to it that his Belarus cannot be considered a serious, fully-fledged participant at this time.

Furthermore, the four priority points must include defense, military and political elements that will add much needed teeth to the Eastern Partnership as well as a vital mission along the lines of the historical Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations.

Due to inconsistent support from the free world, its unstable policies and paranoid behavior, the former captive nations since the early 1990s have been left to their own devices to preserve their independence and freedom. This draft report of the European Parliament gives them justification to align their interests and strengths in defense of their nations. With Russia continuing to rattle its sabers, an economic, commercial, military, defense, political and ideological bloc among the 10 countries that I listed and hopefully others will be enough to send a thunderous signal to Moscow to contain its belligerence and expansion.

These countries could then move to modernize their armed forces and form a single front to ensure their independence, sovereignty and security in the face of the great void that exists today. It will certainly irk Moscow and it may displease Washington, but for the sake of their future, they have no other choice.

This must be the new Eastern Partnership playbook going forward.

Russia Mocks International Accords,

Violates Ceasefire, Kills 41 in 2020

How long will the Zelenskyy Administration and the free world recklessly believe Russian lies, naïvely hoping that the Kremlin can ever change its deceitful, murderous colors?

For six years Russia has waged a war against Ukraine while Kyiv and its free world partners, the United States and others, have sat across a negotiating table from their age-old enemy and accepted its fabrications and promises to abide by a ceasefire while it plans the next bloody attack against Ukrainian defensive positions.

In February 2014, the world cheered and glad handed Russian officials at the closing ceremony of Russian Olympics while Moscow was on the threshold of launching the first phase of its invasion of Ukraine. First Crimea and then Donbas. The international community was immobilized by disbelief.

After numerous failed attempts since then to negotiate an impossible diplomatic end to the war, Russia continues to haughtily brush aside agreements while pressing forward with its mission to re-subjugate Ukraine.

Since the beginning of the year, the Armed Forces of Ukraine suffered 41 killed and 182 wounded. Meanwhile, Putin gloats, Zelenskyy succumbs to Moscow’s demands to accept its mercenary terrorists as legitimate negotiating partners, and the West repeats unpersuasive empty threats as Ukrainian mothers, wives and children cry over the fresh graves of the nation’s heroes.

A month ago Russian forces conducted a major offensive against Ukrainian positions on the night of February 18 that took Ukraine and its allies by surprise and raised questions about whether Moscow really wants peace in Donbas as much as it claims in front of the gullible international arena.

Russian troops fired banned 120mm mortars as well as grenade launchers of various types, and heavy machine guns, as reported by the press center of Ukraine’s Joint Forces Operation on Facebook. Supported by massive fire, Russian invaders launched an offensive operation, attempting to advance across the contact line.

Russia’s military forces later mounted nine attacks on Ukrainian positions in Donbas on March 20, with four Ukrainian soldiers wounded in action, the press center of the Joint Forces Operation (JFO) reported.

The enemy opened fire with prohibited 120mm and 82mm mortars, grenade launchers of various types, heavy machine guns, and small arms. Ukrainian positions near the towns of Maryinka and Krasnohorivka, and the villages of Shyrokyne, Novotroyitske, Krymske, Luhanske, Khutir Vilny, Novhorodske, and Novotoshkivske came under attack.

Interfax Ukraine also reported that Russian invaders violated the ceasefire three times in Donbas on Saturday, March 21, the Defense Ministry of Ukraine said. “Since the beginning of the day, as of 12:00, Russia-led armed formations have violated the ceasefire regime three times. At 3:00 am, Russia-occupation forces attacked the positions of the Joint Forces Operation (JFO) near Novhorodske using a 120mm mortar to launch 15 shells,” the spokesperson for the ministry, Oleksandr Motuzianyk, said at a press briefing in Kyiv on Saturday.

The enemy also mounted an attack near Krasnohorivka using a tripod-mounted anti-tank grenade launcher. Ukrainian defenders returned fire. Another attack was recorded near Novotroyitske, with the enemy using a hand-held anti-tank grenade launcher.
Ukrainian soldiers haven’t been the only casualties of the war. UA Wire reported last week that Aleksander Khodakovsky, a former commander of the Vostok battalion and former Security Minister of Russia’s so-called Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR), described how DPR terrorists killed Ukrainian civilians. Journalist Denis Kazansky posted a fragment of Khodakovsky’s interview on his video blog.

According to Khodakovsky, the Russian mercenaries stopped a car with three civilians at a checkpoint in the Donbas. They confiscated the car and shot people in the back of the heads in a nearby forest. Khodakovsky also admitted that the terrorists robbed a man and shot him in his cottage.

It is obvious that Moscow has never subscribed to a diplomatic conclusion to the war. It has never veered from its historic goal of restoring the Russian empire and recapturing Ukraine and the other now independent countries.

Kyiv, Washington and the free world should stop fooling itself that Russia seeks a negotiated settlement to the war. The only way that peace and security will come to the region is if Ukraine prevails in the war, the free world actively supports it in this mission and helps it expel Russian invaders back to their country. Furthermore, Kyiv must not lose sight of the fact that the enemy and transgressor is Russia, which violated international law, and it cannot enter into negotiations with it under any circumstance unless Moscow is ready to unconditionally surrender and evacuate.