Ukraine SITREP March 3, 13:43 EST

• A mass rally took place today in the city of Odessa.  The demonstrators surrounded the local parliament building and demanded the the elected officials adopt a referendum on the future of the city of Odessa.  The elected officials suggested a 1-2 days of cooling off.  The demonstrators rejected that offer and stormed the building which they now control.
• Close to 700'000 refuges from the Ukraine have sought refuge in Russia.
• In Crimea 6'000 Ukrainian soldiers have switch sides and have pledged allegience to the Crimean authorities.
• The regime in Kiev has appointed two oligarchs as governors in eastern Ukraine even though the 2004 Constitution which this regime claims to have reverted to says that governors must be locally elected. 
• In Donetsk, the wannabe governor oligarch was greeted with a crowd screaming "down! down! down!" and had to leave.  The crowd then took control of the local parliament building an elected a new governor.

That's it for now.  I will keep you posted with further SITREPs.

The Saker

The self-defeating fuite en avant of the US in the Ukraine

The past few days have seen an amazing acceleration of developments which has created a totally new situation.  In simple and plain language the following three momentous events have happened:

1) In Kiev an armed insurrection overthrew the elected President and replaced him with a new revolutionary regime.
2) Crimea completely broke-off from the rest of the Ukraine.
3) An counter-revolutionary insurrection has begun in the eastern Ukraine.

The situation in the eastern Ukraine is a complex one and I don't want to address it at this point in time.  What I propose to do here is to re-state some well-known and undeniable facts, organize them, and then do a basic "compare and contrast" exercise with the two clearly defined regimes/entities which have now formed in the Ukraine: the revolutionary regime in Kiev (which I will refer to as RRK and the secessionist regime in Crimea (which I will refer to as SRC).  I think that this exercise will allow us to fully qualify the decisions made by various governments to recognize and support one side or the other and it could also provide some hopefully useful talking points.  Finally, I want to repeat that I will refer to well-known facts only and I will try to refrain from loaded judgmental statements until I come to the conclusion part.

So let's look and compare the RRK and the SRC by a basic set of criteria.

1) Legal basis of the regime:

RRK: came to power by violent overthrow of the last lawfully elected President.  Then, an self-appointed group of political activists split the main government functions between themselves and went to the Maidan square to get popular approval of the assembled crowd.  Some candidates seems to have been endorsed, others were booed, but all were declared endorsed.  Nobody knows how many people were present at that moment on the Maidan, nor does anybody have any information as to who these people were.

SRC: came to power by peacefully declaring that the local officials would temporarily taken upon themselves all the functions of the federal authority which at that moment in time had already been overthrown by the RRK.  In some cities he former mayors which had been appointed by the Yanukovich regime have been replaced by locals also elected by crowd support.

2) Legality of their decisions:

RRK: Since the former President had fled but never resigned, none of the decisions of the RRK are legal, not by the old constitution, not by the new one.

SRC: The act of taking over the powers of the federal authority was illegal, but considering that the federal authority literally did not exist any more, it could be interpreted as a case of force majeure.

Special forces showed up overnight

 3) Popular support:
 
RRK:by most accounts the RRK enjoys a majority support in western Ukraine, central Ukraine, including Kiev, and north-central Ukraine; it has a probably the support of a minority in some parts of the eastern Ukraine.  In other words, and based on population density, it is most unlikely that more than 50% of the people in the RRK controlled areas actually support this regime.

SRC: I would estimate that the vast majority of Russian-speakers in Crimea support the SRC, something in the 95% or more, and I think that a seizable minority of Tatars also support it.  Still, assuming a 100% opposition of the Tatars and assuming a 15% opposition amongst Russian and Ukrainian speakers that leave no less than 75% of support for the SRC.

4) Foreign patrons:

RRK: whatever the degree of popular support the RRK enjoys in the part of the Ukraine it controls, there is no doubt that its political leaders are basically US appointed (Ms. Nuland said so much).  Furthermore, we also know that the US has spent 5'000'000'000 dollars to overthrow the Yanukovich regime.  As for the armed mobsters which gradually filled the Maindan square, there are numerous reports that these were specially trained groups of the so-called Right Sector which were trained in the Baltic States, in Poland and in Canada.  In other words, the RRK is a pure creation of the West.

SRC: one can speculate what would have happened if the Russian military had not intervened in Crimea, but the fact remains that it did.  There is overwhelming evidence that the "mysterious" armed men which suddenly appeared in Crimea are part of the Russian Spetsnaz GRU, probably the 3rd Independent Spetsnaz Brigade normally based in the city of Toliatti and, possibly supplemented by elements from the 15th peacekeeping brigade or the 31st peacekeeping division.  In other words, the SRC is fully backed by Russia, which also promised it financial support.

5) Ideology:

RRK: nobody denies that the Freedom Party and the Right Sector are neo-Nazis and racists.  The other parties in he RRK could be described as "nationalists", but nationalists who have no problems working hand in hand with neo-Nazis (both Tiagnibok and Iarosh have been offered top positions in the new government).  Also telling is the fact that the first two laws (illegally) adopted by (the illegal) "revolutionary Rada" were to re-authorize the propaganda of Fascism and to revoke the status of Russian as an official language (the RRK as now "revoked this revocation").  Nationalist demonstrations are full of photos of Stepan Bandera and neo-Nazis symbols, which the putatively "moderates" never remove.  Their goal is a unitary Ukraine in the image and likeness of the western Ukraine.

SRC: it has no clear ideology at all.  It is not unreasonable to suspect that some if its supporters are communists, but by no means a majority.  It is clearly pro-Russian, so it could be labeled as both "capitalist" (Russia is a capitalist society) and possibly as "Putinist", though that is by no means certain.  Their goal is a multi-ethnic Crimea which would be a sovereign state in a Ukrainian confederation.

The only real "Ukrainian Army" today

6) Future prospects:

RRK: a lot will depend on the situation in the eastern Ukraine where an insurrection against the RRK seems to be growing in power and resolve and which could see a real civil war taking place.  But even assuming that nothing at all happens in the east, Iatseniuk himself openly said that there is no money at all left and that his entire government is a "kamikaze government".  The RRK has no army, no police, nobody at all to ensure law and order.  Russia will cease its financial support to the RRK and Russian gas will be sold only a the previous price.  A social explosion is simply inevitable at this point.  At this point in time, there are already shortages everywhere and many stores and companies are closed.

SRC: the SRC enjoy a complete monopoly on power in Crimea, thanks to the numerous defections which took place over the past 24 hours, the SRC has its own military, its own police, its own special police (Berkut) and even its own security service (the SBU in Crimea switched sides).  Not only has Russia committed to assist the SRC financially, the SRC has a guaranteed source of revenue from the lease of the bases to the Black Fleet and from the huge amount of wealthy Russian tourists (about 6 millions each year).  At this point in time, all stores and restaurants are open, business is working as usual and there are no signs of social tensions.

Now let's sum it all up:

The USA and the EU have put their full support and political credibility behind a regime which is:

1) Illegal and came to power by violence.
2) Has no right to pass any law.
3) Whose popular support is dubious at best
4) Which is a pure creation of the West.
5) Whose ideology is basically neo-Nazi and/or rabid nationalism.
6) Which no matter what is headed for disaster.

Russia has put its full support and political credibility behind a regime which is:

1) Which is arguably legal, at least over the territory it controls.
2) Which has been forced to temporarily over-step its legal rights.
3) Which clearly enjoy the full support of a majority of the population.
4) Which has been secure in power by Russian military power.
5) Whose ideology is most likely social/liberal and pluralistic.
6) Which has all the means needed to be successful.

From the above I think that it is pretty undeniable that the West is not only supporting the wrong side, and also that this decision is only completely immoral but also amazingly short-sighted.  This is yet another case of what the French called fuite en avant (literally "to flee forward"): when somebody does something clearly and obviously mistaken and then, frightened by that, instead of reversing course decides to run forward at even a higher speed.  In contrast, Russia's decision is not only morally right, it is also pragmatically correct.  But there is more to this than just pragmatism.

Western-backed nationalists

As I have written in the past, for the USA, wrecking the Ukraine is a way of denying it to Russia.  This is a Cold War like logic, a zero-sum game and a way of making Russia pay for being independent of the AngloZionist Empire.  Still, this is also clearly a choice, an "optional crisis", a conflict which really does not have a strategic impact on US national security.  Not so for Russia.

For Russia the conflict on the Ukraine has become an existential issue.  For 20 years Russia did put up with corrupt, oligarchic, pro-Western and anti-Russian regimes, which blackmailed Russia and Europe over gas pipelines and which printed stamps of Stepan Bandera (whom Yushchenko even made "hero of the Ukraine").  Even when the Ukies sent neo-Nazis to support the Chechen Wahabis and when they armed Saakashvili to the teeth, Russia did nothing other than denounce it (nobody gave a damn).  But when it became clear that millions of Russians and Russian-speaking Ukrainians were threatened by neo-Nazis and that a bloodbath in the east was inevitable, Russia decided to act not only to protect its citizens abroad, but to protect itself.

There is also another phenomenon taking place.  Unlike the the USA or Europe, Russians have a much longer attention span.  While in the West nobody cares to ever remember that, Russians do remember the promise made to Gorbachev not to move NATO to the East, they remember the US bombing and invasion of Bosnia and Kosovo, they remember the West's support for Chechen Wahabis and Jewish oligarchs like Berezovsky, they remember the West's full support for Saakashvili's attack on Russian peacekeepers and the people of South Ossetia, they remember the deployment of missiles all around Russia and they remember the war on Libya, and the US and EU sponsored butchery of Syria.  And as one commentator put it yesterday, "this time it is not about Syrians or Ukrainians, it's about us, we are next in line".

Russian forces

Some have said that I make too much of the unanimous decision in the Duma and the Council of the Federation to authorize the use of force because these bodies are controlled by the Kremlin and basically rubber-stamp whatever Putin says.  First, this is not quite true, though there is much truth to it, but what this overlooks is the huge swelling of popular anger and even rage to which these politicians responded as least as much as to order from the Kremlin.  So when I wrote that "Russia is ready for war" I was not exaggerating.  True, in the general public nobody believes that a war will start: most Russians think that Obama, Merkel & Co. will run as soon as Putin bares his fangs, but that is not how people in the Kremlin or the General Staff think.  They know that wars can start for the wrong reasons, that the use of force is always dangerous, that before using military force each possible consequence and effect must be carefully calculated and assessed.  They also know that Obama is the worst and most incompetent President in US history and that they should never assume that he will do the rational, pragmatic thing, even in his own interests.  And I can promise you that when the military took the decision to tell Putin "we can do this" they did consider even the unlikely possibility of a US/NATO military response, either to protect the regime in Kiev, or even in Crimea (where and international coalition lead by Anglo powers already had attacked Russia in the past).  Russians don't do operations like sending the Marines into Beirut or Somalia.  If they use military force they are committed to it.  In this case, it is obvious that they felt that they had no other choice than to draw a thick and clear line in the sand to stop further US aggression by proxy.

Obama and the Neocons:

I have received many emails suggesting that the Neocons imposed that mess upon Obama who did not need that at all. I don't necessarily disagree with that version.  We know that the Republicans negotiated with the Iranians behind Carter's back and we know that the Republicans have a proud tradition of not giving a damn about legalities anyway.  Finally, there are also plenty of Neocons in the Obama administration itself.  But none of this can serve as an excuse.  If Obama really did let himself become a hostage of an operation run behind his back, he did not have to be a coward and fully endorse it when it became obvious.  Yes, I know, Kennedy was murdered for, amongst other things, not supporting the Bay of Pigs.  So what?  That just proves my point: Kennedy was no spineless coward whereas Obama is exactly that.  As are Merkel, Hollande and the rest of them in the EU.

Thus we see these 1%ers still at time: holding emergency sessions in NATO HQ, condemning Russia at the G7, making more threats on TV (Kerry) and at the UN (Powers) - they are all in the fuite en avant mode.  They hope that if enough words are spoken and loud statements are made, this will change something on the ground.  It's wont.  Magical thinking does not work in real life.  Right now there are two possibilities: either a civil war starts in the east of the Ukraine, or the RRC simply collapses and vanishes in thin air (a very real possibility).  After all, what can it do with no money at all and no basic resources?  Sing the Ukie anthem and blame Moscow for it all?  That is hardly a real program.  And even though the western corporate ziomedia tries hard to conceal it - nobody, and I mean *nobody*, in the new regime has *any* idea as to how to begin to address the current problems.  The best they could come up so far is to appoint to multi-billionaire oligarch to run the east and southeast of the Ukraine.  Check out this headline from the Kyiv Post: 

Oligarchs step in to save Ukraine’s sovereignty

It would be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic: the so-called "anti-corruption" revolutionary regime appoints oligarchs to save the Ukraine.  When I saw that one it really felt like we were entering the twilight zone or lala land where the most ridiculous and crazy things could happen.  This makes for great stories, but for politics this is a recipe for disaster.  Sure, these oligarchs have more money that the RRK, but they made that money by robbing the Ukraine of everything it had.  And if anybody seriously believes that the Russians will deal with these two thugs then they are dreaming.

They really mean it

As I wrote in November, the Gates of Hell are opening for the Ukraine.  What is amazing is that the entire western ruling class seems to be determined not only to encourage the Ukraine to step in, but also to risk following it.  For the life of me I cannot imagine a more self-defeating, dangerous, immoral and stupid policy.

The Saker

Okay! Okay! I yield :-)

Dear friends,

You guys are amazing, that is all I can say.... It is 0915 and already 53 replies telling me to go ahead.  Okay, I yield.  I will set up a contributions/donations system.  All I can say is that I am immensely touched and immensely grateful.

One small comment and then we will go back to the more important issues: some have suggested that I put ads on the blog.  Guys, please forgive me, I can't do that.  I hate ads with such a total loathing that I cannot even put it in words.  To me, they are the perfect symbol of everything which I hate in our society and there is just no way I could place ads here.  I know, this is naive and/or stupid, but that is how I am and I cannot change myself.  Seeing an ad here would make me sick.  On my sidebar you can see that I urge you to support the FSF and EFF (as I do by being a member of both), but that's it.  That is the closest to an 'ad' I will ever get.

Anyway, I will come up with some system and let you all know.

Friends - thank you!

The Saker

Reply to comments on the future of this blog

Dear friends,

First, I want to repeat what I said earlier today - I am amazed, awed and deeply moved by your very kind expressions of support for me and my blog.  To say that I am grateful does not even begin to cover it.  I thank you all for your kindness and support - I felt like I was surrounded by a crowd of friends and that is a wonderful feeling.  All I can say again is thank you!

Before addressing your comments, I want to share with you something which continues to amaze me.  Guys - the number of visitors has almost doubled in just three days (somebody please pinch me!!).  See for yourself:

For the life of me I have no idea what is happening, and my only explanation is that some of you have done miracles circulating my articles.  Just two days ago I though 10'000+ was unreal.  And here I am looking at 18'000+...

Needless to say, I am beyond delighted even though I am also amazed and cannot get used to this.

Now, I have to address a point which most of you have made: contributions.

Please forgive me, but I have to confess that I sometimes can be extremely naive and idealistic in a childish way and that I am much more comfortable discussing planning nuclear forces or the advantages of double-hulled submarine designs, than discussing money issues.  Still, I will kick myself in my mental butt and force myself to spill out some of my concerns.

First, and again, this might sound naive, but does money not pollute everything it touches?  The idea of this blog was to just "donate ideas" (hence my disclaimer at the bottom of the page that everything I would write here would be public domain).  This is also the main reason why I chose to blog anonymously: I did not want this blog to be about me.  Only about ideas.  It was important for me to give, to offer, to donate without expecting any benefit for myself, not even recognition or exposure to the public.  Call me naive, but I wanted to create something pure, radically different from all the money-driven blogs out there.  In a world filled with greed, lies and hypocrisy, purity is something which I highly value and don't ever want to lose.   Do I not risk losing this purity by accepting donations?

Second, I know that my anonymity is hair-thin.  The fact is that some of you know my first name and some even know my full identity.  I am not hiding from anybody, I just wanted to remove myself as a person from the blog.  True, there was another reason to my anonymity.  In the past, I worked for some very nasty people who basically blacklisted me for having done the right thing and forced me to emigrate to another country.  At the beginning, I did not want to re-appear on their radars because God only knows what they could do.  So I wanted them to forget about me.  Seventeen years have passed now, and I think that they don't care any more.  A lot of them have lost their jobs anyway or are retired.  To me, it would therefore probably not be a big deal if I published my full name, address, phone and photo.  But if that is at all possible, I would prefer to remain "thinly anonymous".  Is there a way of setting up a donation/contribution scheme on this blog and still remain more or less anonymous?

Third, I will be very honest here and admit that yes, my family and I  badly needs any money which could help us make ends meet (right now, we are not).  So I will admit that I am very very tempted to try to set up something to accept contributions.  But what would be the best way?  PayPal?  Flattr? What would be the easiest way to set up something like that?

Last, but not least - are there any of you who would object to me setting up some kind of donation/contribution scheme?  In my mind, this blog really belongs first and foremost to all of you, and I want to make sure that if I go ahead with this idea, that there is a consensus of my readers that this is okay.

Sorry to take up so much space with my own personal issues at a time when the world is going through yet another big crisis.  But for me this is a really big deal which could really help, but it is also a topic I am extremely shy and unconformable bringing up and I want to make sure that I don't do something wrong.

Please let me know what you think about all this, what you recommend and if you agree that I should go ahead with this idea, what would be the most convenient way for everybody?

Many, many, very sincere and heartfelt thanks and kind regards,

The Saker

Obama, Kerry, the Ukrainian military, Yulia and Klichko

Over the past couple of hours it was it was interesting to observe the reactions to the Russian decision to be read to use military force in the Ukraine.  Let's take them one by one

Obama and Kerry: frankly, I did not expect much, by I still was baffled by how out of touch the White House is with the real world.  To deter Putin from using armed force, the White House decided to threaten him boycott  the next G8 summit in Russia.  Boo hoo!!  I am sure that Putin is now terrified.  Not.  Listening to the Idiot in Chief and his Secretary of State I truly marveled that this still threw the full political weight and credibility of the USA behind a government which even Iatseniuk himself called a "kamikaze government'. Anybody with an IQ at or above room temperature understands that this so called "Ukrainian government" is bound to fail if only because it literally has no money to do *anything*.  And yet, the boneheads in Washington are totally backing this quasi-dead regime.

The Ukrainian military: I am sure that you have heard that the Ukrainian military is now on maximal alert and is read to repel any Russian aggression.  Guys, this is laughable.  There IS NO UKRAINIAN MILITARY.  There is a lot of old hardware lying around, there are a number of units with basically zero training and there are a few units of higher combat readiness.  Do you know what that list is called in military terms? It's called *TARGETS*. I also suspect that if the western politicians and a few Ukie crackpots speak about the Ukrainian armed forces, the officers there, and even the soldiers, fully realize that they are just targets. Hence the wise decision of the flagship of the Ukrainian Navy, the Hetman Sahaidachny frigate, to quickly switch sides even before getting back home (it is in eastern the Mediterranean according to the latest reports).  I suppose you all know that the notion of the Ukies developing their own nuclear weapons is laughable, so I will not bother dwelling on it now.

Yulia and Klichko: As I suspected from her appearance on the Maidan, Yulia clearly lost it and her latest statement about the crisis just proves to me that she is "gone fishing".  In contrast, however, and to be great surprise, it was Klichko who came out with the sanest proposal: he wants to create a special commission in Kiev tasked with negotiating a peaceful resolution of the current crisis between Kiev and Moscow.  Unlike Yulia's hysterical nonsense, Kichko's statement contained no grandstanding or lyrical appeals.  It was all business-like and pragmatic.  Well, who knows, maybe the man can get something done since  I am quite sure that as long as the Ukies do not use force in the east or south the Russians will stay on high alert, but on their side of the border.

That's it for this short update.  Later today I hope to have the time to post a somewhat more analytical look at the recent developments.

Cheers,

The Saker

Short follow up on the recent personal announcement

Dear friends,

I just wanted to let you know that I have been reading your replies to my personal announcement with amazement and a deepest sense of gratitude.  I shall post a substantive reply to what you have written as soon as I find a minute to do so, but right now the situation in the Ukraine is far more important, so that is why I will focus on in priority.  I ask for your understanding and patience, and I promise to reply very soon.

Many thanks and kind regards,

The Saker

Obama just made things much, much worse in the Ukraine - now Russia is ready for war

Something absolutely huge has just happened in Russia: the Russian Council of the Federation, the equivalent of the US Senate, has just UNANIMOUSLY passed a resolution allowing Putin to use Russian armed forces in the Ukraine, something the Duma had requested earlier.  Before the vote took place, Russian senators said that Obama had threatened Russia, insulted the Russian people and that they demanded that Putin recall the Russian ambassador to the USA.  I have never seen such a level of outrage and even rage in Russia as right now.

I hope and pray that Obama, and his advisers, stop and think carefully about their next step because make no mistake about that RUSSIA IS READY FOR WAR.

Now, the resolution of the Council of the Federation does not, repeat, NOT, mean that Russian forces will move into the Ukraine.  Key Russian politicians have already spoken out and clarified that all this did was give the authority to Putin to use the armed forces, but that he was free to decide on whether this was needed or not.

Yet, this is a warning which should not be taken lightly.  The way I see it, it not only means that Russia will act to protect Crimea, but that there is a real possibility that Russia could even use its armed forces elsewhere in the Ukraine and this is a huge development.

In the past days I have listened to many Russian experts, lots of talkshows, political statements, etc. and I was amazed by the fact that nobody even suggested that Russia should intervene militarily.  Everybody agreed that Russia should support the Russian speakers in the Ukraine politically, financially, and morally.  But nobody mentioned the use of force.  So what happened since?

1) some kind of attack on Crimea overnight
and
2) Obama's absolutely imbecile and reckless threats against Russia

And this combination really set things off.  Now, every single political party in the Council of the Federation and every single representative have voted to allow the use of Russian armed force.  That would be the equivalent of the US President getting each member of the House and the Senate to vote to allow him to wage war.

I need to make something else clear here: no amounts of threats will stop the Kremlin now, all that will achieve is to get even more of the public reaction of support for Putin.  And if some wannabe Napoleon or Hitler decided to try to use military forces against Russia the latter will go to war, no matter who is standing against it.

The USA and the EU have to realize that they dangerously overplayed their hand in the Ukraine: they have used neo-Nazis to overthrow a totally corrupt and incompetent President, but a legitimate one, in the process they have wrecked the Ukrainian state apparatus, by allowing so much wanton violence and racist slogans they have totally freaked out the eastern and southern Ukraine, and by either conducting or allowing an attack on Crimea they have threatened the Russian population and the Black Sea Fleet.  That is yet another absolute and TOTAL DISASTER of the Obama Presidency.  This man is as dishonest, as he is mediocre, arrogant and reckless and I hope and pray that the US Joint Chiefs are going to have a "frank exchange of views" with him as soon as possible.  In an ideal world, the Congress should have impeached that despicable loser, but since they are even worse then him, it is for the JCS to act.

The Russians are united, they are really angry and they know that they have the military strength to defend their country and their people in the near abroad.  I don't recommend anybody doubt their resolve because if Russia is attacked its response will be devastating: think 08.08.08 but on a vast scale.

I think that a disaster can, and will, be avoided.  I even hope that the Russian military will not move into the Ukraine, but the US has to rein in both the insurgency government and the Fascists in the streets and tell them all to "cool it".  The next necessary step is to spot the nationalists from trying to seize further buildings in the east and southern Ukraine.  Last, but not least, the USA and Russia should get together to strike some deal which would allow the Ukraine to formally survive as a unitary state, but make it a de-facto confederation with a purely symbolic presidency.

The leaders of the USA and the EU have to now understand that they are playing with fire and that this is not a "Ukrainian" problem: now they themselves are at risk of ending up in a war against Russia, possibly a nuclear one.  And even if they never admit to that publicly, they need to at least have to courage to admit to themselves that they themselves created that situation and that the responsibility for it is fully theirs.

The Saker

Important personal announcement about this blog

Dear friends,

I have decided to take a short break for the torrent of news about the Ukraine to share with you an important development in the life of this blog: two days ago, last Thursday, the number of daily visitors to this blog has passed 10'000 to peak at an amazing 11'538 visitors!  Now, some of them are webcrawlers, search engines, double visitors and my own, but the 10'000 visitors limit has clearly been passed now:

As for the total number of visitors to this blog since its modest beginning in 2007, it will soon pass one million visits:

In fact, since 2013 and especially recently, the number of visitors has literally exploded:

Which is wonderful, especially since the visitors come from all over the world:

 

That is the good news.

There is also bad news.

The bad news is that this is a one-man blog.  I do that alone, with no help.  Worse, I actually have a life outside blogging: a job, a wonderful and much beloved wife, three kids aged (13,16 and 17), I try to do sports (mountain biking, kayaking and free diving) and I have hobbies (reading, photography, jazz guitar and computers); I am working on a Master's thesis in Orthodox theology, and I try to eat and sleep on a semi-regular basis. On the bad side, we also have a credit card debt we cannot reduce and we live literally from paycheck to paycheck, form month to month (I don't make a single penny from the blog).

Since the beginning crisis in the Ukraine began, I have been getting something like 30-50 emails every day.  And I have tried really really hard to answer them all.

On top of that, you can see for yourself that the number of comments on each post now is typically in the 30-50 comments, each of which I have to read and clear personally for blogger to display it.  I also try to answer most comments.  

And then there are the longer analytical post which I write from time to time like the one of the geopolitics of the Ukrainian conflict or the one on the roots of Ukrainian nationalism (roughly 7000 words!) which, even though I typically write them in one long session with no breaks, still take me a full day to write.

Oh, and did I mention I also spend several hours per day trying to inform myself about what is happening, trying to weed out the crap for the real fact in order to get a sense of what is really happening?

What I end up doing is doing all of the above simultaneously with me "normal" life.  For that I use my computer, my Nexus 7 Internet tablet and my smartphone.  I even often wake up at night to take a quick look at the tablet and clear any posts made during the night.

Now, please get me right, I am not complaining.  In fact, I *LOVE* what I do and the immense outpouring of support and kind encouragements motivates me like nothing else.  When I began this blog in 2007 I did it mainly to do something I could never do before in my life: to really speak my mind freely, with nobody to tell me not to say or write this or that, with no boss to fear or please, with no regard at all the reactions my writing might elicit.  I made no efforts at all to advertise this blog, never promoted it anywhere, and I did not give a damn about what kind people would get offended or mad at me.  My other goal was to create a space for free and intelligent discussion between people of different opinions who would know that no matter what they said I would never censor them.  The only thing which I ever refused to post in the comments section was outright commercial spam.  As for the rest, it was a 100% free environment in which the sanction for a ugly or stupid comment could only come in the form of a fact-based and logical reply, but never a ban.

In my wildest dreams I would never have imagined the kind of success this blog is enjoying now.  And, believe me, I am delighted.  But I cannot continue at the same pace, I am 50 year old now and I am physically compelled to decide on priorities.

I promise that I will do my utmost to keep things going as they do now, but I have to warn you about a few things which will have to change, at least somewhat:

1) I cannot commit to replying to every email I get.  Sorry, but if I have to chose between a comment read by 10'000+ people or the email of a single person, I have to chose the former.  I will still try to do my best but I cannot promise and answer to every email, so please do not get offended if you do not get a reply in the future.

2) The same goes for comments.  If I have to chose between a comment which asks about something I have already covered elsewhere, or a basic question and a comment which can generate an interesting conversation of offers an interesting insight, I will have to chose the latter.  I simply cannot keep up trying to answer most comments as before.

Guys, I BEG you: if at all possible, always chose to post a comment and only send me an email if that is to share something personal or confidential.  If you want to share your opinion, ask for mine or ask a question, please, PLEASE use the comments section!!

Also, I want to clarify something about my mailing list.  Guys, this is a low-volume mailing list.  What I mean by that is that I only send out something if I want to draw the attention to something I posted on the blog or when I want to send out a message to my readers.  This is not a way to let you know that something has been posted. For that, please use an RSS client and enter this feed into it: 

Atom: 1.0: http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default
RSS:   2.0: http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss

Also - I want to reiterate something I wrote many many times here but which is worth repeating yet again: there is no such thing as "off-topic" on this blog! (well, except spam and truly moronic meaningless posts).  Please feel free to use the comments section under ANY post to make ANY comment you want: share news, ask questions, provide links, etc.  You will find out that amongst those who comment here there are FAR more interesting and knowledgeable people then myself.  Enjoy that and don't worry about 'off-topicking' - any interesting issue is interesting no matter where no matter when.

I want to conclude this personal announcement about this blog by thanking you all from the very bottom of my heart for the outpouring of support, kindness and (wholly undeserved) compliments.  I had no idea that there was such a hunger for freedom and truth out there or such a rage and disgust at the lying corporate media machine.  I feel honored and privileged at the thought that my modest efforts can be a part of a much larger "mental liberation movement" on the Internet and the citizen-reporter front.  I will still continue to do the best I can on my own little section of the "battlefield" (especially when there are "hot" events taking place), but I ask for your understanding and indulgence if you notice that I cannot answer your email or post: this will in no way be a sign of my lack of interest or appreciation but only a sign of the fact that I am not 20 years old and that I have a finite level of energy I can use every day.

A big "thank you!!" to all, keep me in your prayers and kind regards,

The Saker

Senators suggest recalling Russia’s ambassador from US over Obama speech

RT reports that Russian Senators are going to ask President Vladimir Putin to consider recalling Moscow’s Ambassador to the USA following President Barack Obama’s “aggressive” comments on the situation in Ukraine, the chamber speaker said.

Nationalists captured by pro-Russian crowd in Kharkov

This just sent to me by "T" (thanks!):

The nationalists who had seized the local administration building have been evicted by a pro-Russian crowd after a nasty fight, they are now surrounded by cops who protect them form the angry crowd which is screaming "this is Kharkov, not Kiev!" and "Fascists!":

Huge pro-Russian rallies today in Kharkov and Donetsk

Kharkov

 

Donetsk

 

Some kind of attack on Crimea definitely happened yesterday

First, a shot bullet style news update from the Ukraine:

• New government in Kiev declared that Russia had deployed 6'000 soldiers to the Ukraine.
• A car with 400kg of TNT-equivalent explosives was intercepted a a checkpoint yesterday in Crimea.  There is no word on the diver or possible passengers.
• Crimean authorities had decided to hold the referendum on the status of Crimea on March 30th, and not May 25th as originally decided.
• Gazprom is threatening to cancel the rebate on gas it had granted the Ukraine in December saying that the Ukraine had not paid on time.
• Authorities in Crimea have declared that nationalist insurgents had attempted to seize control of the building of the Internal Ministry building in Crimea.  That assault was repelled by local militias, but there are casualties.
• There are reports of a number of APC intercepted during an attempt to enter the Crimean peninsula.
• The Chairman of the Council of Ministers of Crimea, Sergei Aksionov, declared that Kiev had attempted to nominate a nationalist insurgents as commander of the internal ministry (police) affairs forces in Crimea and that armed insurgents had attempted to seize control of local government buildings.  He therefore appealed to Putin to help protect the Crimean Peninsula.
• Russia declared that it will act on Aksionov's request.
• Telephone, Internet and cell-phone connections were re-established in Crimea (they had been cut by unknown people yesterday)
• The Russian Parliament and the heads of the various parties represented there adopted an appeal to President Putin to take action to protect Crimea.
• In Kiev, Iatseniuk has told his finance minister to contact his Russia counterpart to begin negotiations to financial issues.
• Iatseniuk also promised never to use force in the Crimean Peninsula.
• The self-style "acting President" of the Ukraine, Alexander Turchinov, has declared that he will veto the recent bill of the insurgent-controlled Parliament in Kiev which has repealed the previous "law on languages" and that a new law will have to be adopted.
• Nationalists have taken control of an administration building in Kharkov.  A mass rally around the building has arisen, clashes have been reported between the demonstrators and the nationalists in the building, one reporter has just reported that the crowd had given assault to the building.
• Obama appeared to made a special statement warning of a "price to pay" if Russia intervened militarily in the Ukraine. 

Russian forces in Crimea

What does all that mean?  Can we discern a pattern?  Do these events hint at what the various forces confronting each other might be doing.  Let's ask a few basic questions of common sense:

1) If all parties agreed never to use any violence in Crimea, and if the local people were given a free choice on the future of the Peninsula, which side would win this referendum - the nationalists of the Russian-speaking and pro-Russian majority?  The answer is obvious - the pro-Russians would win.
2) If the pro-Russians are sure to win in any free and fair political contest, who is the party which would benefit from an escalation of violence in Crimea?  The answer is obvious again: the Ukrainian nationalists?
3) Considering that a clear majority of the local population is pro-Russia and that there are plenty of Russian forces in Crimea, what would the Kremlin gain by sending in Russian military forces into Crimea?  Again a obvious answer: nothing.
4) The insurgents in Kiev know that a clear majority of Crimeans is opposed to their rule, and Iatseniuk is trying to negotiate with Russia on economic issues, while Turchinov says that he will veto the repeal of the former law on languages, what could Kiev hope to achieve by sending in insurgent forces into Crimea?  Nothing, of course, it would only make things worse.

and now a few more question I will not immediately answer:

5) Somebody cut off all communications (phone, Internet, cell-phones) out of Crimea yesterday; today is was restored.  Who would gain from that and why?  6) Nobody disputes that some kind of unidentified but clearly professional and pro-Russian force suddenly took control of two airports in Crimea, only to later apologize and withdraw leaving just a few guards.  What could have triggered such a move?
7) Russia has admitted that it had closed the airspace over Crimea overnight.  Why would it do that?
8)  While the 6'000 Russian paratroopers claimed by Kiev appears to be false, it is most likely that some kind of Russian force, supported by helicopters, was seen in operation yesterday.  What could they have been doing?

What follows is only my interpretation and I might be 110% wrong.  Still, this is how I connect the dots.

Some kind of attack on Crimea definitely happened yesterday and it was repelled.  I don't think that the attacking side was controlled by the new regime in Kiev as Iatseniuk and Turchinov had nothing to gain from such an action and much to lose.  I think that the attacking side was a third party, most likely some kind of assault force of Ukrainian and/or Tatar nationalists organized and controlled by US special forces.  I believe that this force tried cutting off the communication lines of the local authorities and attempted to storm the Internal Ministry building to seize control of the local police.  The Russian military clearly believed that some kind of force would be sent to the Crimea by air and that triggered a move by the Russian to seize the airports and defend them by force if needed.  When they saw that their move had been detected and preempted, the attacking force withdrew.  The US was clearly worried enough about the Russian reaction to have Obama issue a public threat about a "price to pay" should Russia invade the Ukraine.  As for the Russians, they are clearly incensed and key political figures have all expressed their demand that the Kremlin take action to protect Crimea.  Both sides are clearly in shock over what took place last night.

What is going to happen next?

Frankly, I believe that unless Obama does something truly extraordinary, Russia will move additional military forces in over the week-end.  The Kremlin simply cannot appear to ignore the plea from the local population.  Considering how much the West has been lying to Russia over the past 30 years or so, it would take some truly extraordinary reassurances and guarantees from the USA to stop a Russian military move into Crimea.  Russia will also take control over the Crimean airspace.  As for the tiny and rusting Ukrainian navy force, nobody needs it, but as long as it sits tight and stays put, it will basically be ignored.

The US and EU reaction to that will be a truckload with of anti-Russians hysterics, followed by a boycott of some meetings and activities, and that's about it.  For Russia, this is even far more important that South Ossetia and Obama understands that, even if he will never acknowledge that publicly.  The US is not going to war with Russia over Crimea.  I think that the real message of Obama to Putin is "don't do the same thing in the eastern Ukraine" (Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, Lugansk, etc.).

On the mid term, Crimea will vote to become an independent state within a Ukrainian Federation with the option to secede should the fascist regime remain in power in Kiev.

So what do you think?  Does my (admittedly highly speculative) interpretation make sense or do you connect the dots differently?

Kind regards,

The Saker