Land for gas: Secret German deal could end Ukraine crisis

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 06:51 PM
link   
This certainly seems like some good news out the Ukraine problems. I'm not surprised Angela Merkel would be working directly with Vladimir Putin to try and deescalate tensions and come to some resolution other than war. I hope they are successful but I'm sure the neo-cons in the US - UK will not be thrilled about this.

Land for gas: secret German deal could end Ukraine crisis


Germany and Russia have been working on a secret plan to broker a peaceful solution to end international tensions over the Ukraine. The Independent can reveal that the peace plan, being worked on by both Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin, hinges on two main ambitions: stabilizing the borders of Ukraine and providing the financially troubled country with a strong economic boost, particularly a new energy agreement ensuring security of gas supplies.

More controversially, if Ms Merkel’s deal were to be acceptable to the Russians, the international community would need to recognize Crimea’s independence and its annexation by Russia, a move that some members of the United Nations might find difficult to stomach.

Sources close to the secret negotiations claim that the first part of the stabilization plan requires Russia to withdraw its financial and military support for the various pro-separatist groups operating in eastern Ukraine. As part of any such agreement, the region would be allowed some devolved powers.

At the same time, the Ukrainian President would agree not to apply to join NATO. In return, President Putin would not seek to block or interfere with the Ukraine’s new trade relations with the European Union under a pact signed a few weeks ago.

The article is somewhat lengthy but worth a read. This looks hopeful to me, in fact maybe the best thing I've seen come out of this so far. Let's hope the US and UK are unable to derail this attempt at cooperation and peace.




posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

Dear Bassago,

I'm glad you found something which may lead to peace anywhere in the world. Let me see if I understand the terms.

Russia gives Ukraine a billion dollars it owes them for back rent, and a promise about gas supplies. They also promise not to give aid to the separatists who are trying to take Eastern Ukraine. They further promise not to block a trade pact between the EU and Ukraine which had already been agreed to and signed.

In exchange for these promises (Will be they be kept? What do we do if they're not?), Ukraine surrenders Crimea, a strategic piece of land worth many, many times a billion dollars and captured in an act of war. They also agree not to try to join NATO so they can get protection if the promises fall through and they're attacked again.

I don't know. I'd ask for more from Russia than that.

Or am I missing something?

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952



Russia gives Ukraine a billion dollars it owes them for back rent and a promise about gas supplies. They also promise not to give aid to the separatists who are trying to take Eastern Ukraine. They further promise not to block a trade pact between the EU and Ukraine which had already been agreed to and signed.


On this I'd say since Kiev owes Russia about $5 billion for unpaid natural gas it seems a fair deal. After the Crimea referendum (which of course the US denounces) I believe Germany is seeing clearly, Crimea voted to rejoin Russia. I believe in the referendum process myself whether in this case it suits the US MIC interests or not is irrelevant.



Ukraine surrenders Crimea, a strategic piece of land worth many, many times a billion dollars and captured in an act of war. They also agree not to try to join NATO so they can get protection if the promises fall through and they're attacked again.


Ukraine has no choice about Crimea the people there have spoken and left the junta Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev. The regime we helped put in place leading up to this whole mess to begin with.

As far as joining NATO it was agreed back in the 90's ((I believe) that the west would not expand NATO into the former Soviet countries. A promise that has obviously been broken again and again. FWIW I don't think that really matters much. If the US want to expand aggression toward Eurasia they will do so. Agreements or not. Same with Russia supporting the separatists.

I'd rather see peace than State Department lies and neo-con inspired aggression.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Peace?..............Is that what you want?
You must know there wont be any......why agonize?
Its all too much handwringing for me.....
The tide of war is irresistible now....



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

So it sounds like this. Russia starts a war, and a peace deal is reached that gives Russia everything they want while royally screwing the Ukraine people and taking away their sovereignty, and giving the Ukraine absolutely nothing.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bassago
Crimea voted to rejoin Russia. I believe in the referendum process myself whether in this case it suits the US MIC interests or not is irrelevant.

Actually they did not. Only 30% of the population actually voted, and only 50% voted in favor. That means as little as 15% of Crimeans voted for annexation.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 08:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

Dear Bassago,

I always enjoy talking with you. You are challenging and force me to learn. I'm grateful. One of the things that I've learned is that the people of Crimea did not have referendum to join with Russia, or approve of it, unless you're thinking about the kind held in North Korea giving 100% to Dear Leader.

Here's an interesting article on the subject. It's primarily a time line with a few additional facts. It says that there was no real referendum or choice of the people to join Russia. I wouldn't want to reward Russia for this kind of behavior either.

www.theguardian.com...


On 27 February, armed men seized government buildings including the regional parliament, putting Russian flags on barricades as they progressed.

Over the next two days, gunmen described as "local ethnic Russian 'self-defense squads'" stormed major airports, including a military-civilian facility in Sevastopol. The murky nature of the seizures – seemingly both methodical and lawless – was amplified when the Russian Night Wolves biker gang, which has close ties to the Kremlin, arrived to guard the latter.

Pro-Russian forces, in unmarked uniforms and equipped with Russian vehicles and weapons, then moved onto the peninsula en masse, surrounding Ukrainian bases and taking up positions in major cities.

• The Kremlin steps in: Russian propaganda and mixed local sentiment fuelled continued (and continuing) confusion, as outrage against western "fascists" mingled with discomfort at the Russian occupation. Though genuine pro-Russian sentiment and deep divisions exist in eastern Ukraine, suspicions persist that Russia has bribed crowds (and violent gangs) – a tactic frequently used by the Kremlin to curb domestic dissent.

After gunmen seized the Crimean parliament on 27 February, it quickly began ousting government chiefs and installing new ones including a new regional prime minister, Sergei Aksyonov, whose alleged ties to Ukraine's criminal underworld have bestowed him the moniker "the Goblin".

With gunmen still camped in and around the building, the regional government decided "the only possible way out of the situation … is applying the principles of direct rule", in accordance with the "underlying principles of democracy".

For example: to counter Kiev's vote to hold elections for a new government on 25 May, Simferopol voted to hold a regional referendum deciding Crimea's future on the same day. Aksyonov subsequently announced himself in charge of all Crimea's military and police and appealed for help from Putin.

Then, in a surprisingly brazen move, the Crimean parliament declared the peninsula a territory of Russia. The referendum would therefore would be moved to 16 March, and would serve only to confirm parliament's vote.

Crimean leaders, meanwhile, took a jaunt to Moscow, where they were met by crowds and the Kremlin elite. On the peninsula, international observers were kept from entering the region by armed men as pro-Russian crowds forced a United Nations envoy to flee.

• Please tick 'No': The referendum ballot itself, as posted a few days ago to the parliament's website, doesn't exactly give voters an option to say "No". The two choices are:
"Do you support joining Crimea with the Russian Federation as a subject of Russia?"

"Do you support restoration of the 1992 Crimean constitution, and Crimea's status as part of Ukraine?

This second option is somewhat contradictory: the 1992 constitution asserts Crimea is an independent state and not part of Ukraine (reference to autonomy within Ukraine was inserted at a later date). So by "supporting the restoration of the 1992 constitution" voters will actually support enhanced autonomy. No matter what, voters are ticking a box for independence from Ukraine.


The people of Crimea have not spoken on this issue. There was no real referendum. Crimea was captured by the Russians and immediately controlled by the Russians. The people weren't involved.

Thanks for encouraging me to look into this.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04



Russia starts a war, and a peace deal is reached that gives Russia everything they want while royally screwing the Ukraine people and taking away their sovereignty, and giving the Ukraine absolutely nothing.


LOL what war did Russia start? I seem to remember our State Department (Victory Nuland) and George Soros NGO's destabilizing a democratically elected government so they could get their neo-nazi puppets in place.



Actually they did not. Only 30% of the population actually voted, and only 50% voted in favor. That means as little as 15% of Crimeans voted for annexation.


Uh huh. So you're blaming this on lousy voter turnout? From what I recall Crimea is essentially ethnic Russian speaking people who did not wish to join the Kiev junta.

Guess we disagree on this.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bassago
a reply to: OccamsRazor04



Russia starts a war, and a peace deal is reached that gives Russia everything they want while royally screwing the Ukraine people and taking away their sovereignty, and giving the Ukraine absolutely nothing.


LOL what war did Russia start? I seem to remember our State Department (Victory Nuland) and George Soros NGO's destabilizing a democratically elected government so they could get their neo-nazi puppets in place.



Actually they did not. Only 30% of the population actually voted, and only 50% voted in favor. That means as little as 15% of Crimeans voted for annexation.


Uh huh. So you're blaming this on lousy voter turnout? From what I recall Crimea is essentially ethnic Russian speaking people who did not wish to join the Kiev junta.

Guess we disagree on this.

The war where Russia invaded Crimea.

I am not blaming it on anything, the people of Crimea did not vote to Annex themselves, they voted to stay as part of Ukraine.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 08:34 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952

Thank you for the link Charles. I've read similar stories in the past and honestly wish I could apply some app to the story that would let me discern truth from lies. In absense of such an app all I can do is apply what I know and understand about people. In this case with a choice between joining with Russia or siding with the neo-nazi affiliated party I believe Crimea chose the only logical choice.


Andriy Parubiy, the new secretary of Ukraine's security council, was a co-founder of the Neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (SNPU), otherwise known as Svoboda. And his deputy, Dmytro Yarosh, is the leader of a party called the Right Sector which, according to historian Timothy Stanley, "flies the old flag of the Ukrainian Nazi collaborators at its rallies."

The Svoboda party has tapped into Nazi symbolism including the "wolf's angel" rune, which resembles a swastika and was worn by members of the Waffen-SS, a panzer division that was declared a criminal organization at Nuremberg. A report from Tel-Aviv University describes the Svoboda party as "an extremist, right-wing, nationalist organization which emphasizes its identification with the ideology of German National Socialism."
HuffPo..

I'm not believing that essentially Russian ethnic people are going to vote or side with the neo-nazi Svoboda party. Regardless of the Guardians article. Guess I just don't like the Nazi's. I'd like your take on that aspect of the issue and our involvement in placing them in power.

edit on 107pm5656pm82014 by Bassago because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 08:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bassago
a reply to: charles1952

Thank you for the link Charles. I've read similar stories in the past and honestly wish I could apply some app to the story that would let me discern truth from lies. In absense of such an app all I can do is apply what I know and understand about people. In this case with a choice between joining with Russia or siding with the neo-nazi affiliated party I believe Crimea chose the only logical choice.


Andriy Parubiy, the new secretary of Ukraine's security council, was a co-founder of the Neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (SNPU), otherwise known as Svoboda. And his deputy, Dmytro Yarosh, is the leader of a party called the Right Sector which, according to historian Timothy Stanley, "flies the old flag of the Ukrainian Nazi collaborators at its rallies."

The Svoboda party has tapped into Nazi symbolism including the "wolf's angel" rune, which resembles a swastika and was worn by members of the Waffen-SS, a panzer division that was declared a criminal organization at Nuremberg. A report from Tel-Aviv University describes the Svoboda party as "an extremist, right-wing, nationalist organization which emphasizes its identification with the ideology of German National Socialism."
HuffPo..

I'm not believing that essentially Russian ethnic people are going to vote or side with the neo-nazi Svoboda party. Regardless of the Guardians article. Guess I just don't like the Nazi's. I'd like your take on that aspect of the issue and our involvement in placing them in power.


Fact is they did not side with Russia. Your belief does not alter facts.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

Dear Bassago,

May I repeat that I learn quite a bit from our conversations? Why don't you nominate yourself for a spot in the ATS hall of fame? I've always found you to be persistent, thoughtful, and polite.

Anyway, to work.

I don't know anything about Svoboda. I suppose fewer than 1% of Americans do. So, you forced me to start where just about everybody starts, Wikipedia. I think you'll disagree with their analysis, but I'd enjoy learning from you.


In February 2004, the arrival of Oleh Tyahnybok as party leader led a significant change in moderating the party's image.[51] Then still the Social-National Party of Ukraine, it changed its name to the All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda",[2] and abandoned the "I + N" ("Idea Natsii" Ukrainian "idea of a nation") Wolfsangel logo (a symbol popular among neo-Nazi groups)[2][38] with a three-fingered hand reminiscent of the 'Tryzub' pro-independence gesture of the late 1980s.[38] Svoboda also pushed neo-Nazi and other radical groups out the party,[108] distancing itself from its neofascist past while retaining the support of extreme nationalists.[51]

Olexiy Haran, a political science professor at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, says “There is a lot of misunderstanding surrounding Svoboda" and that the party is not fascist, but radical. Ihor Kolomoyskyi, president of the United Jewish Community of Ukraine, stated in 2010 that the party has clearly shifted from the far-right to the center.

Political scientist Andreas Umland predicted the party would continue to become more moderate over time, and that "there's a belief that Svoboda will change, once in the Verkhovna Rada, and that they may become proper national democrats."

Since then, the party has gained seats in parliament and has net over 10% of the national vote in the 2012 parliamentary elections. The US ambassador in Kiev, Geoffrey Pyatt, said in 2014 that he had been "positively impressed" by Svoboda's evolution in opposition and by its behavior in parliament. "They have demonstrated their democratic bona fides," the ambassador asserted.

Alexander J. Motyl argues that Svoboda's brand of nationalism "has significantly diminished during, and possibly as a result of, the Euro Revolution."

en.wikipedia.org...(political_party)

If true, it sounds like good news, and may explain why Ukrainians are beginning to support them. Maybe we're not dealing with a "neo-Nazi" party.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952


Olexiy Haran, a political science professor at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, says “There is a lot of misunderstanding surrounding Svoboda" and that the party is not fascist, but radical. Ihor Kolomoyskyi, president of the United Jewish Community of Ukraine, stated in 2010 that the party has clearly shifted from the far-right to the center.

Yes Svoboda has indeed worked hard to change their image but not I believe their substance. When I went to post some info to you previously I was quite surprised at the changes now on Wikipedia in regard to this party in particular since the overthrow of the last government. Well, maybe not too surprised as Wiki seems to have become a political battleground of sorts.

I guess my belief is leopards rarely change their spots. This discussion about whether they are neo-nazi or simply nationalists has seemed to be raging since our NGO sponsored revolution in the country. The great and loud denial from the US in support of them. I'm not so sure. Google "Ukraine neo-nazi" to see some of the older news articles on the issue if you wish.

Thanks also for your other kind words.

edit on 164pm2626pm92014 by Bassago because: dyslexia



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 11:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

In 2008, Putin told George Bush that "Ukraine is not a country. Most of the land there has been gifted by Russia". With such mindset Russian leadership has no reasons to back off from the current mess.

Russia can choke the Ukranian economy by cancelling all the trade and $15B annual exports from Kiev. Russia need not invade Ukraine to get its objectives in the S-E region.

Sorry, but Chancellor Merkel's back office dealing might not work after all.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 11:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: victor7
a reply to: Bassago

In 2008, Putin told George Bush that "Ukraine is not a country. Most of the land there has been gifted by Russia". With such mindset Russian leadership has no reasons to back off from the current mess.

Russia can choke the Ukranian economy by cancelling all the trade and $15B annual exports from Kiev. Russia need not invade Ukraine to get its objectives in the S-E region.

Sorry, but Chancellor Merkel's back office dealing might not work after all.

Source that quote.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

(CNN) -- At the 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest, Romania, Vladimir Putin told a surprised George W. Bush, "You have to understand, George, that Ukraine is not even a country. Part of its territory is in Eastern Europe and the greater part was given to us."

www.cnn.com...



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 12:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dimithae
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

(CNN) -- At the 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest, Romania, Vladimir Putin told a surprised George W. Bush, "You have to understand, George, that Ukraine is not even a country. Part of its territory is in Eastern Europe and the greater part was given to us."

www.cnn.com...

That quote is not what Victor said. Putin is saying much of the land was given TO Russia. Victor is saying much of it was given BY Russia.

His quote is not true. Your quote is definitely how Putin feels. The fact is Ukraine has existed for over 100 years, and was not a "gift".



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 12:17 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Don't waste time splitting hairs. S-E is mostly Russian or Russian speaking. If Ukraine joins that EU, most of the skilled from western areas will leave leaving Kiev with less tax revenues. Russia pulls the plug on $15B trade and even West Ukraine might collapse on itself. Poland might gobble up a part or two.

Btw, today Russia cancelled a big food import related contract with Poland. The main reason, Polish mercenaries were showing up in the "cooked up" Kiev tanks blown up by the rebels. Moldova also met with similar fate on contract cancellation few days back.




posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 12:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: victor7
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Don't waste time splitting hairs. S-E is mostly Russian or Russian speaking. If Ukraine joins that EU, most of the skilled from western areas will leave leaving Kiev with less tax revenues. Russia pulls the plug on $15B trade and even West Ukraine might collapse on itself. Poland might gobble up a part or two.

Btw, today Russia cancelled a big food import related contract with Poland. The main reason, Polish mercenaries were showing up in the "cooked up" Kiev tanks blown up by the rebels. Moldova also met with similar fate on contract cancellation few days back.


It's not splitting hairs. Ukraine gained independence in 100 years ago and was not given anything by Russia. The rest of your post is wishful thinking.



posted on Jul, 31 2014 @ 12:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

Seems reasonable to me. The whole letting Russia get away with the annexation of Crimea part seems like a bad idea, but so does the prospect of Ukraine joining NATO. If the west's long term goals are to have Ukraine join NATO then they are crazier than I thought. I'd be interested to see a poll of how many people living in NATO countries even WANT Ukraine as a member state. I know I don't.





new topics
top topics
 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join