Breaking news: Russia will completely stop the delivery of gaz through the Ukraine

First, I was a little skeptical. Then more and more sources confirmed what seems to be a fact: Russia will completely stop the delivery of gaz through the Ukraine and all Russian gaz will now flow through Turkey (see Bloomberg and LifeNews). Not only that, but the Russians have told the Europeans that if they want Russian gaz, they will have to build their own pipeline to Turkey at pay for it all.

Putin and Miller

The Europeans appear to be shell-shocked. Maros Sefcovic, the European Commission’s vice president for energy union, declared that this decision made "no economic sense".  As if the nonstop economic and political warfare waged by the EU against Russia did make any sense!

I can image the faces of the Eurobureaucrats when Alexei Miller, the head of Gazprom, told them that "now it is up to them to put in place the necessary infrastructure starting from the Turkish-Greek border” while the Russian Energy Minister Novak added that "the decision has been made, we are diversifying and eliminating the risks of unreliable countries that caused problems in past years, including for European consumers.” 

In other words, the EU just lost it all and so did the Ukraine.  Keep in mind that the EU has no other options then to purchase the Russian gas from Turkey while Russia can simply do without gaz exports to Europe because China has already signed a contract covering the exact same amount of gaz and possibly much more.

Let's see now how the infinitely corrupt, arrogant, criminally irresponsible European elites will cope with an agriculture choking in useless surplus stocks, a society waging ideological war on 1.6 billion Muslims, and now with no energy.

The always irreplaceable Poles have come up with a brilliant strategy it appears: they will "not really" invite Putin to the commemoration of the liberation of Auschwitz even though Auschwitz was liberated by the Soviet military.  I am sure that Putin will be both impressed and heartbroken.

Nowadays every time I hear any news out of Europe, I always think that Victoria Nuland's famous "f**k the EU" and how Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, called his colleagues the "great supine protoplasmic invertebrate jellies". I share exactly the same sentiments: let them "Charlies" now freeze in their own pathetic mediocrity.

The Saker

The illegal arrest of Giulietto Chiesa - yet another example of European hypocrisy

by Leonardo

On December 15, 2014 the Italian reporter Giulietto Chiesa, who had been invited to take part in a conference in Tallinn on Russian-European relations, was detained by the Estonian authorities for a few hours after being declared "persona non grata". Facts appear to point to a deliberate move on the part of the Estonian authorities meant to prevent the journalist from attending the conference, thus censoring the speech he was supposed to deliver.

Before diving into the facts, a little background info intended as a frame of reference. 
 

Giulietto Chiesa, journalist and MEP

Giulietto Chiesa is an Italian journalist and former member of the European Parliament. He has been correspondent from Moscow for two different italian newspapers (La Stampa and L'Unità) for 20 years, since 1980. 

In Italy he is presently marginalized for his very critical opinions on a few issues which the mainstream media still consider as taboo. Chiesa is a member of the 9/11 Consensus Panel, a board whose goal is "to provide the world with a clear statement, based on expert independent opinion, of some of the best evidence opposing the official narrative about 9/11". He is also known for being very vocal in opposing western imperialism and the hysterical russophobia that is being spread by the mainstream media. He wrote many articles condemning NATO aggression against Libya, the destabilization of Syria, the eastward expansion of NATO and the western backed coup in Kiev.

According to the Estonian Public Broadcasting, Chiesa was invited in Tallinn on December 15, 2014 by the Impressum NGO to attend a conference titled "Should Europe fear Russia?". Apparently, Estonian authorities consider the Impressum NGO as a russian propaganda proxy. Chiesa had already spoken at Impressum events twice before.

According to Chiesa, he arrived in Tallinn at 12.45 and gave an interview to an Estonian TV channel, had lunch and then went back to his hotel room in order to complete the preparation for the speech he was supposed to give at 19.00.

One and a half hours before the appointed time, a group of four Estonian policemen knocked on his room's door and took him into custody, intimating him to follow them to the local police station. Chiesa was later informed that he was being detained because he was the target of an entry ban signed on 13 December 2014 and valid for one month. He stated that he repeatedly asked the police to show him the related documents but his requests were denied.  He was jailed for four hours, until the arrival of the Italian Ambassador, who managed to have him released a few hours later, after applying diplomatic pressure.

While the incident made the first page of a few Italian online newspapers it didn't get much attention on the Italian television networks, that at most mentioned it casually.

The incident caused some diplomatic friction between Italy and Estonia and the Estonian Ambassador in Rome was summoned by the Italian Foreign Minister looking for answers. 

It also prompted inquiries in both the Italian and European Parliament where a group of representatives (mostly belonging to the leftist list "The Other Europe with Tsipras") filed a protest against what they suspect might constitute an extralegal detention, a violation of the Treaty on European Union, the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Charter on Fundamental Rights.

The Estonian authorities perspective is that Chiesa is a security threat and the detention was justified.

Legal aspects notwithstanding, the detention of Chiesa clearly appears to be motivated by censorship and intimidation: the Estonian authorities are openly troubled by the Italian reporter opinions and they acted to prevent him from sharing them with the few hundred people who were attending the conference. The accusation that Chiesa is some kind of Russian agent of propaganda and as such is a threat to the Estonian state does feel like an excuse: if he really was an immediate and serious danger they would never release him after just a few hours. Which makes the urgency of the detention suspect at best. Also, the timing of the ban, just a few days before Chiesa was to attend the conference, suggests very strongly that the measure was surgically targeted.

What's really troubling - actually, outrageous - is that, no matter if laws were broken or the authorities abused their power, a EU country has infringed on the freedom of speech right of a European citizen, journalist and former member of the parliament. Apparently, the Estonian government - and not the Estonian citizens who could attend the conference and debate or criticize the speech - gets to decide what is Russian propaganda and what isn't. The message is crystal clear and even intimidating. Just think about how a much less renowned journalist could react after realizing that expressing any harshly critical opinion that doesn't measure to the standards of what the authorities consider legit criticism could get him/her branded as a security threat and a Russian agent.

It would also be interesting to know what the authorities of all the other western countries who maintain a heavy state sponsored NGO presence abroad think of the Estonian authorities attitude towards NGOs accused of being instruments of Russian propaganda. If they share the evaluation then how can the double standard be logically reconciled?

This incident casts another shadow on Europe and suggests that the tearing of the democratic fabric and the degeneration of the common sense that follows in the wake of the anti-Russian media campaign might be slowly spreading to the whole continent.

The self-evidently absurd "logic" of the EU

The latest EU decision against Russia is amazing it it's self-evident stupidity.  The EU has adopted sanctions which will only be put into effect if the ceasefire does not hold.

First, the obvious assumption here is that should the ceasefire not hold, it would clearly by Russia's fault.  No, not the Novorussian's fault, but Russia's.

art: Josetxo Ezcurra

Second, apparently, the possibility that the Ukrainians might break the ceasefire was not even considered or, if it was, then it was dismissed.

Third, considering that the Ukies have literally been *begging* the West for anti-Russian sanctions, the EU has just given them a fantastic motive to break the ceasefire.

Fourth, the EU apparently believes that Russia is afraid of EU sanctions even though all the signs, from senior Kremlin officials to opinion polls, show that neither the Russian rulers nor the Russian people are concerned about EU sanctions.  In fact, the only people really concerned about these sanctions are Putin's main opponents: the pro-Western, pro-EU liberal westernizing elites.

Three key documents outline the "wisdom" of the Eurobureaucrats on the issue of anti-Russian sanctions:

The "Statement by the President of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy on further EU restrictive measures against Russia"

The "Joint letter by the President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, and the President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, on restrictive measures against Russia"

The "Conclusions of the Special meeting of the European Council (30 August 2014)".

Reading these documents it becomes clear that the EU officials are either completely out of touch with reality or completely dishonest.  For example, they speak of the "aggression by Russian armed forces on Ukrainian soil" even though they offer no evidence whatsoever about this "invisible invasion" which, by the way, is even denied by the Junta in Kiev (in order to secure yet another IMF loan).

Herman Van Rompuy

This is all disgusting, amusing, pathetic, or alarming - depending on your perspective.  What it is most definitley not is serious.

Frankly, and I will admit that this immature on my part, but I cannot wait to have the EU adopt the next package of sanctions.  Why?  Because I already delight in the panic in Europe when Russia will slap them right back with a ban on EU carrier flights over Russia or, for example, sanctions against the automobile or aerospace industry.  Whatever the Russians come up with, the EU will know that it brought this upon itself and for absolutely no discernible reason at all.

Yet again, I can only wholeheartedly agree with Mrs Nuland's sentiments towards the EU.

The Saker

A telling illustration about the real nature of the US-EU relationship

Dear friends,

Very little is really know about the inner workings of the US-EU relationship and the corporate media only serves us the official and completely meaningless propaganda line. During the war in Korea, General MacArthur's insane threats to use nuclear weapons did trigger something of an European revolt (unlike the US, Europe was well within reach of Soviet bombers, including those with nuclear weapons). Could the absolute insanity of what is taking place in the Ukraine also trigger a European awakening? Could the European elites ever find it in themselves to stand up to the almighty Uncle Sam?

Check out the short article below which, I think, is an amazing illustration of the real nature of the US-EU relationship.

This article was translated from French into English by the same wonderful people who are the editors of vineyardsaker.fr, the French-language "mirror+" ("plus" because it has more than just translations of what is posted here). To them, yet again, I owe a big "merci les amis!".

Kind regards,

The Saker
-------

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: negotiations between Brussels and Washington

The following information refers to the way in which the TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) is being negotiated between Brussels and Washington. We use the term “Brussels” because indeed, it is being negotiated between the European Commission and the United States, not between the member states and the United States. The latter is currently imposing a non-disclosure of the proposition negotiations to the member states, under the pretense that the federal government of the United States does not disclose the European propositions to the individual governments of its federated states.

The only way by which the European Commission has shared these propositions with its member states has been inacceptable: through “documents reserve rooms” where individuals can consult the American files, on the payment of a fee and within a strict set of regulations: no copying, photography, or writing instruments are allowed in the room. Only two individuals are allowed in the reserve room at once, and for a limited time.

Under these conditions, the administrative services of the member states will not have the capacity to analyze the American proposition: despite a maximum capacity to “screen” the information made available, one administration at a time, too many of the weak links will remain overlooked: no one is immune from missing the important lines, placed where they are least expected it or purposefully hidden, which may produce serious risks for either our exportation practices, or in terms of importation.

Up to now it was assumed that, even if individual citizens could not participate in the negotiation processes, the interests of each member state would be defended through the analytical work of each ministry on their particular register of issues. The rigidity of the US on the question of confidentiality leaves all decision taking to the European Commission; when one looks upon the results on display in Canada, it’s very concerning.

Besides, the operative argument shows that the United States have not understood the structure of the European Union: how can we negotiate under such conditions, when they are projecting their institutional reality upon us?

We need to alert the general public about these procedures of negotiations, which are much more serious than the non-communication of the mandate (which was negotiated by the member states after an analysis by the services of each state).

Europeans have no idea to what extent they are being colonized, in the strict sense of the word, by the United States. This information should be disseminated as broadly as possible, as it is eye-opening. Even if it is probably already too late...

Jean-Paul Baquiast
www.europesolidaire.eu

My rant tonight - okay, I will try to clarify further

Okay, predictably some has misunderstood my rant as a change in heart.  Others wonder what has changed over the past 24 hours.  So let me clarify:

1) No change of heart?  No - Putin did the right thing by waiting as long as was possible.  I just don't believe that waiting is possible any more.  Why not?

2) What has changed?  Not just words, but actions by Poroshenko.  I, along with many other observers in Russia, had hopes that Poroshenko would use his "clean hands status" to come up with at least a temporary cease-fire followed by negotiations.  Heck - even a 48 hour break to "celebrate" his "election" would have been helpful.  All that happened was a dramatic increase in violence.  Also, Merkel did specifically ask for a meeting with Putin and I had some hopes that the bitch has something useful to say to him.  But the EU leaders did, again, show that as soon as Uncle Shmuel shows up they turn into the "great supine protoplasmic invertebrate jellies".

Finally, Poroshenko did more than just spew some garden variety Ukie nonsense.  He specifically committed himself to one language, no federation, no negotiations (at least not with those folks who matter) and he topped it all with a completely surreal statement about the Crimea being forever Ukie.  Ok, these are not just words, the man cornered himself into a crazy, maximalist position.  Some ask what I was expecting and say add that Poroshenko had no other options. Nonsense!  He could have said something along these lines:

The blood of the glorious Ukrainian people is sacred to me and my first duty is to prevent it from being spilled (= stop the shelling).  I shall never rest until each and every Ukrainian will feel that he/she is a precious part of an inclusive Ukrainian society whose historical roots have always been diverse and multi-national (language issue).  The Ukraine must forever become a land of peace and peaceful trade (= neutrality).  There is no personal sacrifice I shall not consent to achieve these lofty goals (= negotiate with the Novorossians).  Etc. etc. etc.

Guys, this is not that hard.  Not to mention that NOW would have been the correct time to get rid of the Nazis while the "eyes of the world" were upon the "legitimate President of the Ukraine".

Poroshenko totally blew it.  Totally. 

And not because he is dumb.  All those who know him agree on two things: he is a total prostitute and he is very smart.  In this case, he was simply reading the speech written for him by Uncle Shmuel.

So that is what changed: 

a) a total collapse and surrender by the EU 1%ers
b) a total sellout of Poroshenko to Uncle Shmuel

And this is why I see no point in waiting any longer.  That, and the fact that if time is on Russia's side (which it is - Banderastan is not viable), time is not on the side of the people of Novorossia who need help now.

So no, no change of heart.  Change in objective circumstances.  Remember dialectics 101: a quantitative change does eventually result in a qualitative change.  I think that we have reached this point now.

As for my fear, it is primarily triggered by what I perceive as a "wishy-washy" tone out of Moscow.  If that tone is designed to allow for a last ditch effort (I hear that Poroshenko has now announced that combats should stop this week) or for a cover for an intervention - fine.  But something needs to be done in the next 24-48 hours and my Bosnian experience makes it very hard for me to live through these next couple of days.

Last, and frankly: I want the Polite Armed Men in Green to make minced meat of the Ukie Nazis involved in this disgusting war on civilians.  These SOBs don't deserve to live, imnsho.

I hope that I have explained myself to the satisfaction of at least most of you.

Kind regards,

The Saker

Media rage in Russia - how long can the Kremlin resist it?

It is always tricky to try to get a sense of what is happening in a country by parsings its media as there is often a big disconnect between what the talking heads say and what most of the people really feel.  And yet, this can a useful exercise in the following circumstances:

A) The media is pretty tightly controlled by the regime in power at which point is can be analyzed to see what kind of "consent manufacturing" or "opinion massaging" is being performed.  For example, most wars are normally preceded by media vilification campaign against the other side.  Thus, observing such a vilification campaign can be considered as an "indicator" or even "warning" of a possible military attack, especially is other indicators and warnings point to the same eventual outcome

B) The media is more or less independent from the regime, but primarily linked to the national elites and their agenda.  Here again, because these elites, by definition, have power and access, they can use the media to put pressure on the formal leaders of the country.  Think of the Israel Lobby and its use of the US media to promote the wars on Iraq, Iran and Syria.

C) Finally, the media can be more or less "in tune with" the general public and its concerns, hopes and ideas, at which point it can offer a good insight into what is going on.

Regardless of which of the models above applies to Russia (for what it is worth, I personally think that it is a mix of the three), it is, I strongly believe, very important to note the following fact: three of the most popular shows on Russian TV have increasingly become strident in their outrage over what is happening in the Ukraine, over the US's hypocrisy and over the need to put a stop to the atrocities committed by the Ukrainian junta.  These shows are:

• Sunday Evening with Vladimir Soloviev (Воскресный Вечер с Владимиром Соловьевым)
• Politics with Petr Tolstoi (Политика с Петром Толстым)
• News of the Week with Dmitri Kiselev (Вести Недели с Дмитрием Киселевым)

I think that it is worth saying a few words about these shows.

Sunday Evening with Vladimir Soloviev:

This show is hosted by a very famous personality, Vladimir Soloviev, who is a very interesting guy.  Soloviev is a Jew, and he is not shy about reminding his audience about it, who was even elected as a member of the Presidium of the Russian Jewish Congress.  He is also a Russian patriot who categorically denies that there is anti-Semitism in Russia, much less so state sponsored, and he is a very outspoken supporter of Putin and his policies.  He is categorically opposed to the junta in Kiev and to Ukie neo-Nazism and he does not mince his words about them.  He has several shows where in often invites very controversial personalities, including Zhirinovsky, which he very skillfully interviews.  While Soloviev's style is definitely "popular", he is also very smart, quick to think on his feet, well read and outspoken to a degree few Russian journalists dare to me.  His position on the Ukraine is simple: he as a Jew and as a Russian has zero tolerance for Ukie nationalism, neo-Nazism or Banderism.  He is a determined and total enemy of the new regime.

Politics with Peter Tolstoi:

I would describe this show as a somewhat more sophisticated version of the previous one, possibly addressed at a more mature audience.  The host, Petr Tolstoi, and his co-host, Alexander Gordon (another patriotic Russian Jew), are more soft spoken in their style, but they are also no less anti-junta and anti-Nazi than Soloviev.  Their show regularly has guest from the Ukraine, including high visibility ones like Oleg Tsarev or representatives of the self-declared popular republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.

New of the Week with Dmitri Kiselev:

Kiselev is often see as the "voice of the Kremlin" which has recently appointed him to run the newly created official Russian media agency "Rossiia Segodnia" (which in English translates into "Russia Today" but which should not be confused with the RT TV Channel run by Margarita Simonian).  Kiselev is a very outspoken critic of the West for which he is absolutely hated by the western media which accuses him of homophobia, anti-Semitism, propaganda, lies, etc.  Unlike the two previous shows I mentioned, "News of the Week" is what is called an "author's news show" in Russia, a mix of news and personal commentary.  It airs on Sunday evenings.

The first thing which I noticed is that the two first shows which, in theory, are weekly shows have for a while no run special editions on a regular basis.  For example, Soloviev's "Sunday Evening" show can now regularly be seen on week days, sometimes several times in the same week, besides its normal Sunday airtime.  Clearly these shows are in a full overdrive mode.

Second, it is hard to convey here the level of absolute rage, disgust and frustration of most of the hosts and guests about the situation in the Ukraine.  Furthermore, those few representatives of the pro-US Russian "liberal" non-system opposition (too small get make it to the Duma) or the representatives of Yanukovich's "Party of Regions" who dare to show up often end up being literally mobbed, if not by the hosts, then by the other guests.  As for the hosts, they politely but mercilessly rip apart all the arguments of these two categories of guests.  Pro-junta guests from the Ukraine, they don't dare show up on these shows anymore (they tried in the past, and got mercilessly destroyed each time).  Kiselevs' show being more of a newscast, he does feature statements or interviews made by pro-US or pro-junta people, but they are always followed by a blunt rebuttal of their arguments and a passionate denunciation of their hypocrisy.

I took these three examples because of their high visibility but this also applies to the rest of the Russian TV media.  Even those channels (like Ren-TV) or journalists (like Tatiana Mitkova) who used to be very "democratic" and "liberal" have radically changed their tune.  Now they are almost on the frontline of the anti-junta and generally anti-western journalism in Russia.  Oh sure, some liberal leftovers from the past (like that ugly old fart Pozner) still have their shows on air, and some TV (Dozhd) or radio (Ekho Moskvy) stations still parrot the "Psaki" narrative, but they are clearly struggling to survive and their audience is becoming smaller and smaller.

So what does that all mean for Putin?

Contrary to some of the "armchair strategist" who post comments here about Putin of selling out, being a coward or a hypocrite, something in the range of 80% of Russians support him and his handling of the events in the Ukraine.  So far, his personal position and authority are as rock solid as ever.  However, watching the amazing evolution of the Russian TV over the past few months, I come to one of three possible conclusions:

1) If hypothesis A above is correct, then the Kremlin is engaged in a massive PR campaign to prepare the Russian public for a military intervention in the Ukraine.
2) If hypothesis B above is correct, then there is a very influential segment of the Russian elites which is engaged in a campaign to force the Kremlin to militarily intervene in the Ukraine.
3) If hypothesis C above is correct, then there is such a groundswell of outrage and disgust in the Russian public opinion that the Kremlin will have no other choice but to militarily intervene to stop the terror operations of the junta.

As I said above, my personal feeling that the reality of Russian media today is a mix of A+B+C, in which case there is a gradual coalescing of anger and determination taking place on all levels of the Russian society which will eventually result in a Russian military intervention against the Ukrainian death squads in Novorossia.

All this is to make the following point: when I wrote yesterday that the "crazies", as I called them might, well get what they want (a Russian military intervention) - I really meant it.  I still think that this would be very bad for Russia, the Ukraine and Europe, but that does not mean that I am oblivious to the fact that it might happen, very soon in fact.

My sense is that Poroshenko or, more accurately his puppet-masters in Washington, have just a few days left to stop the so-called "anti terrorist operation".  From the recent meeting in France, I get mixed messages.  Merkel and Hollande probably would prefer that this insanity stop now.  But Obama and his puppet-masters?  Simply put, and no matter how hard Putin might try, there are provocations which the Kremlin simply cannot ignore.

Today I heard that there are already 12'000 refugees just in the Rostov-on-the-Don area.  That means that the real numbers are way higher.  Furthermore, the Ukie Air Force is now using cluster munitions and deliberate attacks on local towns and villages which are pretty much getting flattened or, at leas, burned to the ground.  And I did get a confirmation that the Ukrainian death squads have executed wounded combatants in a hospital near Kramatorsk.  In the meantime, Putin has informally met with Poroshenko in France, the (completely incompetent) Russian ambassador to Kiev has returned from his "consultations" in Moscow and he will attend the inauguration of Poroshenko.  While I fully understand what the Kremlin is doing (denying the US the kind of "enemy" it wants) and while I fully support that goal, I am also aware that this policy cannot be sustained much longer and that something will have to happen soon, very soon.  Right now, my personal hunch, my guesstimate, is that the US will over-rule the EU and that Poroshenko will not only continue, but even escalate the junta's terror operations in the east and southeast.  If that is indeed what happens, Russia will intervene, there is, alas, no doubt in my mind at all. How?

What a Russian military intervention might look like

Russia might pretend try to get a UNSC resolution supporting a peacemaking operation of the CSTO in the Ukraine, if only just to make sure that all legal options have been exhausted.  Then I would expect to see a no-fly zone declared over the Donetsk and Lugansk regions, combined with the opening, by force if needed (it will), of humanitarian corridors towards these regions.  At this point I expect the Ukie junta to fold and run, but if some units do not, they will be destroyed.  The purely military phase of this intervention will take no more than 24 hours and will more or less stop at the administrative border between the Lugansk and Donetsk regions and the Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk and Zaporozhie regions.  If directly threatened, of course, Russian forces could strike deeper inside the rest of the Ukraine, targeting missile/artillery positions or enemy airpower (in the air or on the ground).  At this point I would expect some EU leader to do what Sakozy did in 08.08.08 and travel to Moscow to agree to a ceasefire which Moscow would accept.  Once the situation in the Donbass is more or less stabilized, I would expect Russia to pull out most of Russian forces, probably "forgetting a few "goodies" here and there, not unlike what happened in South Ossetia.  Finally, and especially if the EU continues to allow the US to imposed its insane and counter-productive foreign policy (or what passes for it) on Europe, I would expect Russia to recognize the People's Republic of Novorossia and provide it with security guarantees (again, the model of Ossetia and Abkhazia applies).

Again, I would prefer if a solution could be found without an overt Russian military intervention, but obviously that does not depend on me.  The Americans are stuck, they have failed at everything, and they have no other choice than to engage in a idiotic media campaign to convince the world that "Putin has blinked" and that "Obama is a tough President".  This is quite ridiculous, of course, as this is not about a John Wayne style "blinking exercise" but about the future of the European continent.  But the European politicians are so corrupt, so spineless, so mediocre and so incompetent (remember how Boris Johnson, Mayor of London called some of them "great supine protoplasmic invertebrate jellies"?) that they will probably let the Americans decide the future or Europe for them.

I hope that I am wrong, but chances are that a Russian military intervention will happen in the not too distant future.

The Saker

Why Russia should withdraw from all European organizations

I have just watched another pure propaganda piece by the BBC about the OSCE observers being sent back at a Crimean checkpoint along some footage footage of a journalist being beat up and the sound of some shots which the BBC says were aimed at the tires of car.  I will ignore all of the nonsense reported by this so-called "journalist" whom Alain Soral would most definitely call "une pute", but I want to focus on the core issue of this event: are the Crimeans right or wrong to deny entry to the OSCE "unarmed military observers"?

In my opinion, they are absolutely correct.  Here is why:

Russia has seen these so-called "observers" in Chechnia, in Bosnia, in Kosovo, in South Ossetia and its always the exact same story: these guys are "professionally blind" to what might contradict the official narrative of their professional hierarchy.  For one thing, a good part of them are actually members of their respective military intelligences services (they barely bother to hide it).  So they very much share in the corporate culture of their military.  Can you imagine a Polish or an Estonia "observer" having anything good to say about the Russian military?  Of course not.  I have met these guys personally and I can attest - they are hopeless.

But there is another thing, even more important: the OSCE, like all the rest of the European organizations, is rotten to the core, staffed by career-oriented bureaucrats.  Frankly, I think that Russia should withdraw from the OSCE, close its offices in Russia and simply ignore it.  I will go even further, I think that Russia should withdraw from ALL European organizations, all of them, not only the OSCE.  What did the Council of Europe ever do for Russia?  What about the North Atlantic Cooperation Council: did it ever do anything good for Russia? What about the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, the Partnership for Peace or the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development - did any of these organizations ever do anything good for Russia?

Of course not!

These European organizations have only two purposes: first, to give the appearance that Europe matters and, second, to provide nice and cozy jobs to an army of bureaucrats.  The reality, of course, is that there is only one entity which matters in Europe: the USA and its colonial administration "NATO".  If the Russians need to talk to the boss - they can dial the White House or speak to the US ambassador.  Even about so-called European affairs.  Because, as a political entity - Europe does not exist.  And for those doubting what I say, I have a simple basic question: when did any European organization ever stand up and say "no" to Uncle Sam?  Okay, yes, it did, on trivial matters, and commercial interests.  But on an important international policy issue?

Never.

So all Russia does by participating in these organizations is to give credence to the myth that there is an independent Europe out there, when there really isn't any.

The sad reality is that Europe is the America's bitch, and it will do whatever Uncle Sam says and the EU current flag should be replaced by one showoing a submissive poodle.  So if Russia, or the Crimeans, decided to let some "observers" who are in reality doing Uncle Sam's bidding enter Crimea, they might as well get these observers from the 82nd Airborne or the CIA's Special Activities Division, why bother with these euroclowns from Estonia or Slovenia?  At least the Americans would be real professionals, not pretend-soldiers...

The EU deserves no respect and Russia should stop acting like Europeans matter when they clearly don't.

The Saker

EU politicians reach a new landmark in mindless subservience to Israel

Recently, we had the EU politicians committing an act of "air piracy" on behalf of the USA, now we have the same folks committing an act of abject subservience to Israel: they have declared that the military wing of Hezbollah is a terrorist organization.  Of course, this statement has nothing to do with terrorism, it is an attempt at punishing Hezbollah for its successful intervention in the Syrian conflict.  The BBC openly admits that.

Needless to say, Hezbollah couldn't care less about such nonsense: it has no assets or supporters in the EU anyway, and it also understands that regardless of that statement EU governments will, of course, continue to discreetly talk with Hezbollah "off the record".

I can attest to the following here: I know for a fact that in many, if not most, European countries there are semi-official Hezbollah representatives who live there and with whom the local authorities maintain contacts "off the record".

General Structure of Hezbollah

The rather amusing thing is that the EU decided to only declare the "military wing" of Hezbollah as a terrorist organization as opposed to some "civilian wing" which presumably would be very different.  This reminds me of the differentiation made between the IRA and Sinn Féin or between ETA and Herri Batasuna, but its completely inapplicable to Hezbollah whose structure is far more unitary than the EU pretends to believe (see chart; source). 

Bottom line: yet again, the EU achieves nothing other than further humiliate itself and proving its status of US/Israeli colony.  It really seems to me that empty symbolic gestures are all which the Europeans are capable off or, better, trusted with.

Real decisions, of course, are made in the USA and Israel.

The Saker

Short update on the fallout following the "Imperial Skyjacking"

Here is a short update on the fallout following the "Imperial Skyjacking" of President Evo Morales' airplane over Europe.

• Paris expressed "regrets" but did not present excuses.
• Demonstrators threw stones at the French Embassy in La Paz
• The Bolivian Parliament will demand the expulsion of the French, Italian and Portuguese ambassadors
• The Argentinian President Christina Fernandez de Krichner has declared that the Europeans "they have all gone completely insane!"
• UNASUR is meeting tomorrow to discuss the situation

Now all this would all be funny if we were still living in the 1970s or 1980s when Europe was feeling rich and secure and Latin America was looked down as the playground for petty dictators and thieves.  It appears that the EU plutocrats are unaware of the fact that nowadays it is Europe which is terminally sick, the Eurozone which is about to explode and the EU which is run by corrupt dictators.  And against this apocalyptic background, the Europeans have the nerve to insult all of Latin America?!

In reality all this does is deepen the chasm between the political "West" (NATO) and the rest of the world which is fed up being treated with a contempt bordering on racism.

By picking on the soft-spoken and gentle Evo Morales as the target of their latest imperial folly, the Europeans also insulted all the indigenous people worldwide who rightly feel that Morales is their political, cultural or spiritual leader.

It might not be immediately perceptible, but there will be hell to pay down the road, in particular in economical and political terms.  The amount of bad karma generated by this latest European idiocy is truly monumental.

The Saker

The EU - acting on behalf of Uncle Sam - commits an act of piracy against a head of state!

Just on Monday I called the entire European political class "the worst hypocrites on the planet" along with a few other less-than-complimentary things. And this morning I learn this:

‘Imperial Skyjacking’: Bolivian presidential plane grounded in Austria over Snowden stowaway suspicions: not only did the governments of France, Portugal, Spain and Italy illegally close their airspace to President Morales' presidential plane, the Austrians actually had the nerve to search it and then they proudly declared: "Our colleagues from the airport had a look and can give assurances that no one is on board who is not a Bolivian citizen," (Austrian Deputy Chancellor Michael Spindelegger).

As for President Morales, he declared "It's not an offence against the president, it is an offence against the country, against the whole of the Latin American region (...) almost a kidnapping of 13 hours".

I usually try to avoid profanity and vulgar expressions.  But sometimes only a crude and rude expression can truly convey the sense of something disgusting beyond words.  When I read the latest news this morning my first thought was that Europeans have truly become what Americans call "punk-ass bitches".

Typical EU politicians

The Mayor of London recently managed to express a similar feeling, but without using any profanity.  He called his colleagues "Great supine protoplasmic invertebrate jellies!" (see hilarious video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VsyfXswjIg).

So have your pick - both the US and the UK version perfectly fit an entire continent which has clearly slouched down to a condition of terminal degeneracy.

One more thing.  Obama.  Words fail me to express my disgust with him.  Dubya at least was clearly a drooling idiot, a total ignoramus, a moron who got to "play President" only to the degree that his daddy (Cheney) let him.  But Obama is clearly intelligent, charming, well educated, which leaves him with absolutely no excuse at all for being the worst lying President in US history.  Remember how he said that he "would not scramble jets" to get Snowden?  Well, yeah, I guess he did not.  He let his European minions do that for him.

The last Russian Tsar, Nicholas II, made an amazing entry into his diary the day his entire entourage forced him to abdicate.  He wrote "all I see around me is cowardice, betrayal and deceit".  I have always thought that this was the perfect characterization of the entire 20th century, a diagnosis really.  It sure looks to me that the 21st might be even worse.

The Saker