September 4th 23:53 UTC/ZULU Ukraine SITREP: Maybe, just maybe?

Many major developments to report today.  First, though I was trying very hard to contain my excitement over the past days, the level of success the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF) against the Junta Repression Forces (JRF) appears to be absolutely amazing and, should Mariupol fall, which appears to be likely, I would speak of a strategic victory, something which I am normally extremely reluctant to do, especially when speaking to a force which only recently was a volunteer militia force.  How could that possibly have happened?

Military situation:

I think that there is a second expression which now can be used without exaggeration: all the signs are that the JRF have reached their breaking point: this is the moment when a military force suddenly and completely collapses, like a damn which blows out under the pressure of water.  The JRF is not retreating on one, two or even three directions, it is retreating everywhere (except north of Lugansk).  Entire battalions are leaving the front under orders of their battalion commanders and without the approval of the Junta leaders.  At least one such battalion commander is already being judged for desertion.  The entire Ukie leadership seems to be in a panic mode, especially Iatseniuk and Kolomoiski, while the Nazis are mad as hell at the Poroshenko administration.  There are constant rumors of an anti-Poroshenko coup by outraged Nazi nationalists.  And then, there are the absolutely staggering Ukrainian losses.

[I have stricken out the following section due to protest by it's author who accused me of "grossly exaggerating" and "misrepresenting" his figures]

There is one such list which I reader sent me who, according to my reader, was published on Zero Hedge, but I could not find it there.  I did find it here though:

Ukrainian forces casualties and losses 2 May - 21 August
Casualties
Total: 32.702
Dead and wounded: 20.274
Prisoner, deserters and missing: 12.418
Destroyed or captured materiel:
I. Aviation
Attack
- 16 Su-25 (one captured 7 July)
Bomber
- 7 Su-24
Fighter
- 2 MiG-29
Recon
- 1 AN-30
- 6 drones
Transport
- 2 AN-26
- 2 IL 76
I.a Helicopters
- 20 attack and transport Mi-24, Mi-17 y Mi-8
II. Ground forces materiel
Tanks Total: 347 ( 68 captured )
- 319 T-64 ( 65 captured )
- 2 T-64 Bulat
- 7 T-72 ( 3 captured )
- 19 T-84-U Oplot
Armored vehicles Total: 602 ( 119 captured )
- 163 BMP Infantry Fighting Vehicle, tracked ( 69 capturados )
- 125 BMD IFV Paratroopers, tracked ( 9 captured )
- 312 BTR Armored Personnel Carrier, wheeled ( 39 captured )
- 2 BRDM Scout Vehicle, wheeled ( 2 captured )
Artillery Total: 180 ( 122 captured pieces )
- 4 SO-203 2S7 "Pion" 203mm
- 5 SAU 2S3 "Acacia" 152mm (1 captured )
- 30 SAU 122 2S1 Gvozdika 122mm ( 25 captured )
- 2 Mortars 2S4 Tyulpan 240mm(2 captured
- 6 Mortars SAU Nona 120mm (6 captured )
- 21 Antiaircraft guns ZU 23-2 ( 18 captured )
- 24 Rocket launcher Grad 122mm ( 24 captured )
- 11 Rocket launcher Uragan 220mm (4 captured )
- 45 howitzer D-30 122mm ( 10 captured )
- 32 mortars82mm ( 32 captured )
Trucks and cars Total: 153 (124 captured )
- 5 Hummer
- Jeep
- 25-66 GaZ
- Staff car
- Mobile crane
- 1 ZIL 131
- 2 KrAZ
- 58 Ural trucks
- 69 Kamaz trucks
- 4 UAZ 469
Last edited by von Junzt; 23 Aug 14 at 07:42. 

Now I am not endorsing this list since I don't even know who made it up or on what basis.  

But I will say that it is consistent with.  Check out this list and this one (thanks to GM for the link!!).   Finally, this list is also consistent with all the footage shown on the various video hosting sites such as YouTube.  I will even add that this list is clearly incomplete since it was made before the biggest Ukie losses occurred.  But let's not look at the exact numbers, let's look at the suggested magnitude.  This tells us that:

• 40'000+ Ukrainian soldiers have died.
• 600+ armored vehicles have been lost.
• 200+ artillery pieces have been lost (probably many more in reality).
• Most of the Ukie aviation in flying condition has been lost.

If, as it appears likely, the real number of dead JRF soldiers is anywhere near the 30'000+40'000+ figure, then this is something absolutely unique in modern warfare.  There might be an exception to this I have missed, but as far I can know in every single conflict since WWII (and including WWII), civilians have died in far greater numbers than combatants.  This is also absolutely true of NAF soldiers who have died in far smaller numbers than Novorussian civilians.  So unless these figures are completely off the mark, and I see no reason to believe this, the Junta forces were absolutely massacred in an horrible butchery which cannot completely be explained by the superb fighting skills of the Novorussians: clearly the Junta has used these forces as cannon fodder with not even a modicum of care, nevermind support, for them.  Yes, the Novorussians had God, morale, common sense, the Truth, the GRU, history, decency, international law, covert support from Russia and whatever else on their side but that does not explain the mind-boggling casualty figures of the Ukie side.

To me a life is a life, and a Ukie life is no less precious than a Russki life.  Yes, I am delighted and relieved that the JRF were defeated and that the horrors which the Novorussians had to live through will possibly end soon.  But I feel heartbroken and immensely said for the thousands of innocent Ukrainians who were used by their Junta and sent to die in the process of a criminal operation whose goal was the ethnically cleanse the entire Donbass of its population.  And I am proud and happy by the way Russia and the Novorussians have treated the Ukie deserters and POWs.  Even the worst ones, the artillery crews, which were shown videos of whom they murdered and of what they destroyed, they were confronted with their victims and sometimes they were ordered to work to rebuilt, as much as can be, the buildings which they had destroyed (some broke down in complete hysterics, by the way).  But they were no shot, tortured, mistreated in any way.  They received medical attention, they were washed, clothed, fed and eventually sent back home.  I consider that treatment another huge moral victory for the Russian Orthodox side whose effects it will take many years to fully access.

The bottom line is this: Poroshenko promised a victory in a matter of weeks and his forces suffered one of the most total defeats in the history of warfare.  Can the Ukies rearm?  Yes, to some degree.  Do they still have huge weapons stores?  Yes, but all the (comparatively) better gear has been used by now.  Can they still conduct a 4th, 5th and 6th mobilization?  Possibly.  Though the public mood is ominous at this time.  Can the AngloZionists send them instructors, equipment and money?  Yes.  Will that turn the tide?  Probably not.  Unless the Ukies have held back and secretly trained a large number of soldiers over the past 3-4 months (like the Novorussians have done in Russia) and unless these soldiers are now ready to be sent in, fully equipped and ready to go, I don't see the JRF bouncing back for a very long time.  But the most likely thing is that this ridiculous "Banderastan" experiment has seriously begun sinking now and that many rats are leaving the ship.  Last, but not least, for the very first time some mentally sane voices are being heard on Ukie TV.

For example, I have seen very interesting footage of a Ukie general (possibly retired) who, speaking in Russian, told a press conference that enough people had died and that it was wrong that people born in the same country, having the same culture and the same language (yes, he really said that!) were killing each other.  He concluded "we are not only tired of shooting, we are tired of killing".  That kind of talk was never heard only weeks ago on Ukie TV.  Sure, that creep Savik Shuster is still inviting Nazis on his 3 hour long weekly program, but I bet you that he has already made his suitcases and has an exist strategy ready (a move to Israel is what I suspect he will do).

NATO summit: the mouse that roared

It's too early to call this one since it's not over yet, but so far hot air and a general impression of irrelevance seems to be the only result from this summit.  First, the US and the UK have announced more sanctions which makes me wonder about the other countries.  Now they say the that US and EU will impose sanctions, but we know that the Czechs and Slovaks have promised to veto any such move.  But even if they do, this will be more of the kind of symbolic nonsense like banning Russian banks (who are leaving anyway) or Russian officials (who now see that as a mark of great honor).  The goofiest idea came from, what else, the British who want to cut Russia off the SWIFT network.  Which makes the Russians wonder how the EU wants to pay for its gas.  Oh, and then there is this 10'000 men rapid reaction force whose creation is supposed to terrify the Kremlin.  Let me tell you, as a military analyst, that rapid reaction forces are - by definition - not something you can use in a conventional war against a continental power like Russia with large number of men, artillery and armor.  That is absolutely laughable.  But even better is this: while the US and EU are discussing the creation of this force, Putin has already given the order to DOUBLE the size of the Russian Airborne Forces which, by the way, are superior (in training, equipment and capabilities) to any comparable western force, bar none.

art: Josetxo Ezcurra

Please understand me right: I am not dismissing NATO at all.  As a militarized political organization its capability for malevolence is immense, but this is primary a problem for the EU countries which, at best, are something between a US protectorate or colony, and who have to put up with the ugly consequences of being subservient to this fully US-controlled supra-national enforcement instrument.  For Russia the problem is the castrating effect NATO has on EU politicians as shown by the grotesquely stupid move by Francois Hollande to cancel (probably only *delay*) the delivery of the Mistrals to Russia.  That kind of nonsense is the real by-product of NATO membership, but that hardly makes NATO a credible military threat.

Speaking of Hollande and his decision to delay the delivery of the Mistrals, the BBC gave some figures of the costs involved for France:

A French diplomat earlier said the contract was suspended until November, and the delay "could cost us 1bn euros".  The deal is worth 1.2bn euros - and Russia is reported to have paid most of it, so breach of contract would mean France having to reimburse that money.  In addition, France would be liable for an extra 251m-euro penalty payment, French news website LCI reports. 

Of course, the real costs of this debacle is a huge loss of credibility for France and its international image.  It's is all very well to proudly say "la France! la France!" but when you act as a poodle you get treated like one.  In the polite world of international diplomacy nobody will say much, but everybody will know that everybody knows.  And, of course, none of that hurts Russia one bit.  At the most, the full complex of western "sanctions" against Russia are a short-term mild annoyance and a fantastic opportunity to finally tackle some much delayed and most urgently needed reforms.  Frankly, I think that these sanctions are a blessing and, apparently, so do most Russians (according to recent opinion polls).

The EU - finally getting a little fed up?

There is no doubt that the EU's abject subservience to AngloZionists has really hurt European economic and political interests.  Not only that, but from an EU point of view, the situation in Banderastan is getting worse and worse and even worse.  There are some signs that both the Poroshenko regime and the EU are finally becoming aware that unless they do something really, really, soon things might get much worse.  And, exactly as Oleg Tsarev had predicted it, as soon as the NAF scored its first major victories the EU and Poroshenko suddenly became interested in negotiations.  And, right on time, Putin offered his peace plan.

Putin's 7 point peace plan

As peace plans come, this one is pretty much a no-brainer and contains only rather obvious points.  Hardly earth shattering, but still a very good basis, especially when combined with a clear message to the Ukies that Russia is not a part to this conflict and that everything must be negotiated in direct talks with Novorussia.  As for the Novorussians, they have already basically agreed to a slightly amended version of the plan.  Interestingly, so apparently has Poroshenko.  In contrast, Iatseniuk is enraged and apparently wants to built a wall along the Russian border (he really seems off his meds recently).  Finally, it appears that Merkel and the OSCE are fully backing the plan, while Fabius is very reluctantly "not opposed".

Of course, we all know that the Ukies and the EU have broken every single agreement they ever committed to since this war started, but this time there is no doubt left whatsoever about the outcome should no negotiated agreement be reached.  And since the Ukies and the EU need this peace plan much more than Russia, they might want to stick to their word this time.  Maybe.

An important thing about this plan is that it contains only immediate to short-term elements.  There is nothing at all in it about any final status for Novorussia or, for that matter, of the rest of the Ukraine.  And this exact how this should be.  Why? Because what is important in this plan is not what it says, but what it implies: "you have lost and we can restart this one anytime we want".  Yes, I know, neither the Novorussians nor the Russians have said any such thing, but remember that making threats is not the Russian way.  Russians do not promise, they do not threaten - they just act.  And if Obama, Cameron or Hollande are too stupid to understand this, Poroshenko (being, as any other Ukie "oligarch", a Mafia boss) knows that very well.  I promise you that there is a deep level of mutual understanding between Putin and Poroshenko which no western leader will ever imagine.

The smile which says it all

For all the bullshit about nationalism and politics, they are both Russian strongmen, clan bosses, and even if Poroshenko is a tiny little insect in comparison to Putin, they still have that "clan boss" culture in common and that means that Putin has absolutely no need to make any threats to Poroshenko simply because Poroshenko already knows.  For example, I heard on Ukie TV that Putin had allegedly told an OSCE official that "if he wanted he could take Kiev in two weeks".  Whether this is true or not (I doubt it - it can be done is less time) is not the point.  The point is that this is exactly the kind of "explanations" which Putin does not need to convey to Poroshenko, but that he might need to "clarify reality" to some western diplomat of the "intellectual caliber" of, say, Hollande or Rasmussen.

So are the Europeans waking up?  Is the Russian strategy to push a wedge between the EU and the US working?  I think that this is too early to tell, but I am becoming cautiously optimistic.  The way Merkel immediately endorsed the "Putin plan" might be a sign that at least Germany is starting to seriously feel the heat.

Tomorrow in Minsk?

Tomorrow will be huge.  Not only is the NATO summit concluding, but the Ukies are meeting with the Novorussians under the watchful eyes of Russia and Belarus.  Apparently topics will range from energy to the peace plan (the EU probably will want guarantees for its gas in exchange for supporting the plan).  The biggest threat now is that the AngloZionists and their Nazi allies in the Ukraine will be very very angry if a deal is made.  Frankly, Poroshenko is taking a big personal risk, but since his situation is already very precarious, he might have figured that an 11th hour "rebranding" of himself as a "peacemaker" might not be the worst possible outcome, especially if the Germans try hard to protect him.  As for the US, it might turn to its time-honored tradition and simply dump Poroshenko.  My biggest concern are the bona fide Nazis a la Iarosh, Timoshenko, Iatseniuk or Tiagnibok who will be absolutely outraged at any deal made with Putin.  Likewise, the oligarchs like Akhmetov and Kolomoiski (who hate each other) will also be furious, as will Hunter Biden.

art: Josetxo Ezcurra

The sad fact is that there is a entire clique of Ukrainian Nazis and oligarchs who much rather continue the war against Russia (because this is, of course, what this is really all about!) to the last Ukrainian soldier if need be rather than accepting a deal, especially a very bitter one like the one presented to Kiev right now.  Because, let's be honest here, this will be packaged in all sorts of noble and lofty words, but we are talking about a capitulation and not some kind of meaningful compromise, at least form the Ukie point of view.

What the Ukraine really needs right now is a real process of denazification.  There is another "Ukraine" out there, at least potentially if not historically, which could be very different from the Banderastan the AngloZionists have created.  Yes, Ukrainian nationalism is the product of centuries of west European machinations and conspiracies, but this does not mean that it has to forever remain hostage of the hateful forces which have created it.  For one thing, this conflict has constantly obfuscated the fact that most Ukrainians and most Russians want an independent Ukraine to exist.  This will be hard to prove at this point, but I believe that the only region of the ex-Ukraine which really wanted to join Russia was Crimea.  The Donbass would have settled for much less.  I am absolutely convinced that the stupid Nazis really did it to themselves, that blinded by their rabid hatred of everything Russia or Orthodox they simply could not help act the way they did, because it was "in their nature".  Now it is too late to turn things around, you cannot magically undo that horrible and crazy civil war.  But it might be possible to use the reflexion about the causes and results of this outcome to push for a real denazification of the Ukraine.  After all, no matter how brainwashed they currently are, most Ukrainians will come to realize that it took the crazy Ukie nationalists only 6 months to completely destroy their country and that all that this sick ideology of hatred and ignorance brought them is poverty, violence, humiliation and death.  But I am looking way to far ahead.

Let's see what tomorrow brings (or not) and then where this might lead us.  What is certain is that even if tomorrow brings a vapid and meaningless NATO summit and a peace deal in Minsk, this will be way way way too early to celebrate.  At best, it will be one first step in the right direction, but only one step on a long and still very dangerous road.

Stay tuned, I will try to keep you informed the best I can.

Kind regards,

The Saker

August 28th to September 3rd Iraq SITREP by Mindfriedo: MashAllah: Whatever pleases God! The beginning of the end of Daash in Iraq!

Quote of the day (An Angry Iraqi Shia Relative of the young men killed in Spykar, Tikrit): We will march on Tikrit and seek revenge, revenge I tell you revenge. We will make the Sunni tribes pay, blood has been spilt! Why did they (Sunni tribes) allow them (Daash) to do this? We will destroy Tikrit from the face of this earth. No army in this world can stop us.

28th Aug: 6 German soldiers arrive in Iraqi Kurdistan to coordinate with the Iraqi Government and Kurdish authorities and help facilitate the transfer of military and material aid.
28th Aug: The United States decides to air drop essential supplies to the residents of Amerli and bomb besieging Daash forces.
28th Aug: Moqtada Al Sadr meets with Ammar al-Hakim of the Islamic Supreme Council and releases a statement: We agree on the need to do a real partnership in Iraq to meet the security challenges in the country.
Sadr has also stated that he acted on the wishes of the Marja (Sistani) when he opposed Nouri Al Maliki and made sure the latter had to step down.
28th Aug: Nechirvan Barzani, President of Iraqi Kurdistan’s regional government travels to Turkey and meets with its President Erdogan and the new Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu.
28th Aug: An American Jury in Washington DC is deliberating the fate of 4 American Blackwater Mercenaries/murderers responsible for indiscriminately shooting at more than 30 Iraqis in Baghdad in 2007. The shooting had resulted in the deaths of 14 and had wounded another 18.
28th Aug: Collapse of Daash: Peshmerga forces are making rapid progress in taking back Zammar and Ain Zala to the north west of Mosul in Nineveh. Peshmergas are advancing from four directions and the Iraqi Air Force and US warplanes are carrying out airstrikes on Daash fighters in the area. In some cases, and in a reversal of sorts, Daash fighters are abandoning their weapons and fleeing.
18 Daash fighters are picked up by advancing Peshmergas to the west of Zammar. 19 vehicles belonging to Daash are destroyed in air strikes.
The Peshmergas are reported close to the centre of town. Daash fighters are mingling with civilians in an attempt to flee.
Daash fighters burn oil drums in Ain Zala in an attempt to slow down advancing Peshmerga fighters.
28th Aug: Another blow for Higher Education in Daash’s Iraq: Ibrahim al-Fahdawi, Dean of the Agricultural Department at the University of Ramadi is killed in a possible road side bombing cum assassination.
28th Aug: Iraqi Security Forces are gathering their forces outside of Tuz Khurmato preparing to liberate Amerli. They are being backed by Shia militias.
28th Aug: Daash terrorists attack and destroy two shrines belonging to the Kakayeen Kurdish clan in Hamdania, Nineveh. 20000 families are displaced by Daash in Hamdania.
28th Aug: Peshmerga fighters attack two vehicles carrying weapons near Jalawla and kill and injure 8 Daash fighters.

29th Aug: Mishan al-Jubouri, the former MP of Salah al Din province states that 280 bodies of Shia recruits killed at the Spykar military base have been returned to relatives in Iraq. The rest of the bodies are still buried in mass graves near Spykar base.
29th Aug: Police Personnel in Anbar are demanding better weapons from the Government in Baghdad in order to fight Daash and take back control of towns and cities in Anbar.

30th Aug: Peshmerga forces enter Zammar
30th Aug: Mwafaq Hawijah Ali a leader of Daash dies from his injuries and proceeds to hell. He was injured in a failed attack on the Baiji Refinery.
30th Aug: MashAllah: The Iraqi Ministry of Defence announces the freeing of 6 villages in Amerli and the destruction of 5 tanks and 5 vehicles belonging to Daash and the culling of 59 Daash Terrorist. Fa Inaa HizbAllah hum fi Ghalibun.
30th Aug: Peshmerga forces carry out a large scale attack to the west of Mosul under US air cover. The aim is to purge Daash from the area.
30th Aug: a Suicide bomb attack on the Mahmudiyah district of Southern Baghdad has left a number of people dead and injured.
30th Aug: US airplanes target and destroy 7 vehicles of Daash fighters near Mosul Dam.
30th Aug: Issuing resolutions that neither Israel nor its patsy Daash wants to follow: The UN passes resolution number 2175 that calls for the protection of UN workers in conflict zones.
30th Aug: Shamelessness: American Secretary of State, who resembles the living dead, John Kerry calls for a broad alliance of nations that will help fight Daash. In a cruel and tragic irony this alliance will include, champion of Poisoned Islam, Saudi Arabia, and American stooge Jordan.
30th Aug: Sunni uprising against a Sunni uprising: Qasim al-Fahdawi, MP from Anbar, states that Tribes in Anbar are drawing up plans to rise up and take back cities under Daash control.
30th Aug: To the victor the spoils: Semi Formal negotiations for Abadi’s future cabinet have distributed Iraq’s ministries as follows:
Shias (National Alliance): Defense and Foreign
Kurds: Oil
Sunnis: Interior
Negotiations are ongoing with the National Alliance still insisting more ministries based on its vote share.
30th Aug: The flesh trade: 300 Yazidi girls are sold by Daash to its fighters in Syria

31st Aug: US aircraft carry out raids on Daash positions around Amerli and airdrop supplies for its residents
The US also carries out 5 airstrikes on Daash Vehicles in the north near Mosul Dam
31st Aug: Salim al-Jubouri, Speaker of Iraq’s Parliament arrives in Babil to inspect the situation on the ground first hand. Conflict is still raging in Babil where security Forces are trying to remove Daash that had occupied the north of Babil on the 10th of June.
31st Aug: Prime Minister of arguably the second most racist country on Earth, where refugees are interred in Desert Caps (Prisons), Tony Abbot, states that the aircraft of his countries Air Force will help the American’s deliver arms to the Kurds.
31st Aug: Rambo to the rescue: US Veterans send a message to a Kurdish Media Outlet stating that they are willing to volunteer in the Peshmergas to help fight Daash.
31st Aug: Brigadier General Hossein Dehghan of the Iranian Ministry of Defense states that Iran is coordinating with Iraqi Forces to ensure the safety of the Iran Iraq Border and that Daash is a phenomenon (project) that Iraq will wipe out on its own.
31st Aug: One time front man of the Americans, Ahmad Chalabi of the Iraqi National Party meets with Massoud Barzani in Erbil to discuss the security and political situation in Iraq.
31st Aug: Iraqi Security forces aided by Peshmerga fighters and backed by Shia militias start to attack Daash and lift the siege of Amerli.
Fighters of Sadr’s Salam Brigades enter the town of Amerli amidst heavy fighting. Iraqi Security Forces and Peshmerga fighters break the siege and the back of Daash.
Local “Shia” militias attack and free three towns to the east of Tikrit. They were backed by the Iraqi Air Force.
The Peshmergas are reporting that the Daash fighters they are now facing have lost their “will.” They are using mosque loudspeakers to ask their fighters to leave the areas of Sulieman Bek.
The Peshmergas retake three villages in Sulaiman Bek.
31st Aug: 3 Martyred men and 8 injured “Shia” militia fighters are brought to a hospital in Tuz Khurmato. They were injured fighting Daash around Amerli.
But do not think of those that have been slain in God's cause as dead. Nay, they are alive! With their Sustainer have they their sustenance (3:169)
31st Aug: Jassim Mohammed Jaafar, a Turkoman Minister, confirms that Government forces and Shia militias have broken the siege of Amerli. He fails to give credit to the Peshmergas that were also fighting.
Like the Nazis fleeing Soviet troops and surrendering to Allied Armies, Daash fighters flee towards the Peshmergas and away from Shia Militias. The Peshmergas report arresting/capturing 36 Daash fighters in their attack on Amerli.

1st Sep: The UN decides to hold a special session that will oversee the dispatching of UN teams to investigate the human rights abuses carried out by Daash. The session was requested by Iraq and backed by both Iran and the US.
1st Sep: Marthiya Afkham, of the Iranian Foreign Ministry congratulates the Iraqi Security Forces, Government, Sistani, and the people of Amerli for breaking the siege of Daash.
1st Sep: Obama plans a visit to Eastern Europe, Estonia, and then the UK to discuss NATO’s expansion, aid to Georgia, the US made crisis in the Ukraine, and the failed US projects of Iraq and Afghanistan.
1st Sep: President of Iraq, Fuad Masum, states that the first priority of the Iraqi Government, on whose formation he states there is considerable progress, will be fighting and defeating Daash.
1st Sep: Ezzat Saber, Minister of Natural Resources in Iraqi Kurdistan, resigns over rising fuel prices.
1st Sep: Protesters gather outside the Kurdish Parliament demanding that the Natural Resources Committee in parliament resign over rising fuel prices. They stated that the rise in prices was senseless as Iraq controls 5% of the world’s oil reserves.
1st Aug: Peshmerga and Iraqi Security Forces carry out a joint operation and surround the sub district of Sulaiman Bek. The morale of Daash fighters is believed to be low and many are fleeing the area.
The Peshmergas and Iraqi Army liberate Suleiman Bek
1st Sep: War crime: Daash terrorists blow up a Yazidi shrine while 15 elderly Yazidis are still inside
1st Sep: The Peshmergas kill 4 Daash terrorist including a would be suicide bomber as they attack a Peshmerga check post on the outside of Jalawla

2nd Sep: Relatives of those killed at the Spykar Military base protest over the deaths of their loved ones at what can only be described as complete incompetence and arrogance on the part of the Head of the Armed Forces Maliki and his rotten Generals. They enter and occupy the Iraqi Parliament Building in Baghdad, set fire to property and break down doors out of anger. May God grant them patience and may they take solace in the grieving of Imam Hussain (as).
Security Forces are called in to control the situation after casualties are reported. The bodyguards of a number of MPs were also beaten up.
2nd Sep: Robert Stephen Beecroft, the US Ambassador to Iraq, has called on the National Alliance and has reportedly applied “pressure” on it to relent and meet some of the demands being made by the mostly Sunni Iraqi forces coalition.
2nd Sep: The Basra police arrest a man 75 km to the north of Basra believed to be a financer of Daash. He was in the possession of counterfeit currency.
2nd Sep: Iyad Allawi of the National Coalition states that he is expected to play a big role in the next government of national reconciliation.
2nd Sep: Hollande of France tells the visiting, one of many dime a barrel Princes, Crown Prince Salman Abdulaziz that France will help Iraq (Kurds) fight Daash.
2nd Sep: A village of the Al-Zarkosh tribe in Hamrin, Diyala is under constant Mortar attack. The Shia tribe has been supporting the government against the insurgency. It is now complaining of a total lack of security or political assistance from the government. More than 280 members of the tribe have been killed so far.
The governor of Diyala, Amer al-Majmaee, has stated that the attack carried out on the Musaib bin Omair mosque that resulted in over 40 fatalities was carried out by three members of the Al-Zarkosh tribe.
2nd Sep: Daash withdraws its forces from Daqouq after the breaking of its siege of Amerli by Iraqi Security Forces.
Clashes are now taking place in al Mutassim near Samarra after Daash attacked security forces there.
2nd Sep: A mourning ceremony is held to commemorate those Peshmergas killed in freeing Yakinja, on the outskirts of Suliman Bek, Salah al Din province. A commander of the Peshmerga forces, Harbi Kokhie and Brigadier Sheikh Serbest were amongst those martyred fighting Daash terrorists. The ceremony was overseen by the former President of Iraq Jalal Talibani.
2nd Sep: Peshmerga forces are preparing to attack and take back the Christian town of Tilkaif, 15 kilometers to the north of Mosul. The US is carrying out air strikes on Daash positions inside the town to soften them up for the Peshmergas. The Curse of God on the Oppressors (Daash)!
Nowhere to hide: US airplanes have also hit Daash targets near Mosul Dam.
2nd Sep: Daash admits to its defeat in Amerli and to the collapse of its siege of the town. It claims that the Shias needed 5000 troops to free a town surrounded by less than 150 Daash fighters.

3rd Sep: PsyOps: Iraqi Air Force drops leaflets over Mosul warning residents to stay away from Daash’s headquarters about to be bombed and to avoid Daash vehicles to avoid being hit.
Daash evacuates its headquarters that are later bombed by the Americans.
3rd Sep: Maliki decides to include the residents of Amerli into those entitled to receive aid under the displaced nationals’ category. He also talks at length about the impeding defeat of Daash “The coming days will prove that Iraq will be a graveyard for ISIS who began fleeing from Salahuddin, Diyala and Mosul.”
Maliki also suggests the forming of a militia of volunteer fighters from Amerli and states that the resilience of the people of the town should be an example for all Iraqis.
3rd Sep: The National Alliance states that it has been unable to comply with the decree of religious authorities (Marjas) and reduce the number of Ministries being set up. It has run into political, legal, and constitutional difficulties in trying to form a lean government.
3rd Sep: Tribal leaders from Anbar have voiced their support for the Iraqi Government and Haider Al Abadi and its fight against terrorism. They have requested the government to empower and allow local fighters to take on the terrorists occupying the cities of Ramadi, Fallujah and towns bordering Syria.
3rd Sept: 10 people belonging to volunteer militias are injured in a car bombing in the centre of Samarra, near the Imam Al Askari (as) Shrine.
3rd Sep: Mohammad Karim al-Rubaie, advisor to the Governor of Diyala, is killed in clashes with Daash fighters in a village near Amerli. Al Rubaie was also a member of Sadr’s Al Salam brigade. He was killed in clashes between Daash and the Security Forces, volunteer militia fighters, and Al Salam brigade fighters.
3rd Sept: Haider Al Abadi, Prime Minister in waiting, states that the perpetrators of the mass killing of recruits at Spykar base will be punished. He also added that anyone who has harmed Iraqis in this turbulent period will be pursued and brought to justice.
3rd Sep: The changing of tunes: America’s lackey, and forever two faced British Prime Minister David Cameroon refers to Daash as being a threat to the people of Iraq, Syria, Britain, and most importantly, his beloved USA
3rd Sep: UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon, reacts to the killing of journalist Steven Sotloff and refers to the situation in Iraq as outrageous.
3rd Sept: Obama sends in another 350 “Advisors” to Iraq, raising the total number to 820.
3rd Sep: The Iraqi Army has taken back control of Al Atheem dam in the north of Baqouba. The army’s operation was supported by air strikes and resulted in the death of an unknown Daash commander (Emir)
3rd Sep: Iraqi Security Forces capture a Chinese member of Daash and release his picture. He appears badly bruised in the face. China has estimated that 30 of its nationals are fighting for Daash.
3rd Sep: Govt claims for the day:
20 Daash fighters are killed in air strikes in Dhuluiya, south of Tikrit
More Daash fighters are killed in air strikes on Tikrit including a local Daash leader Khairallah Nayef al-Janabi
45 Daash/rebel fighters killed in Fallujah including a Saudi national in air strikes in Fallujah
3rd Sep: 9 bodies are found in Baghdad in what appear to be summary executions

4th Sep: Statement of the family of murdered US journalist Steven Sotloff:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29056608
4th Sep: Kurdish and Yazidi fighters carry out a joint security operation and ambush and kill 6 Daash fighters in Sinjar
4th Sep: Haider Al Abadi, Prime Minister in Waiting of Iraq, requests the EU for assistance in fighting Daash
4th Sep: Pope Francis to the Christians of Iraq “the Church is hurting with you and is proud of you.”
4th Sep: Fiedel Castro refers to Daash as being an instrument of US Israeli project aimed at extending their control of the region.
4th Sep: Iraqi Security Forces are hit by a suicide bomber in the south of Tikrit; 7 dead and 17 wounded.
4th Sep: A mass grave is discovered in Sulaiman Bek. It contains 24 bodies believed to be of kidnapped truck drivers.
4th Sep: Shia Peace Brigade Militia fighters’ state that killed 30 Daash fighters in a village on the outskirts of Amerli. They state that the fire fight lasted 6 hours.
4th Sep: Governor of Nineveh, Atheel al-Nujaifi, probably out of fear of reprisals, states that only forces of the Iraqi Government: Army and police, will be allowed to enter the province.
4th Sep: Qais al-Khazali, leader of the Shia sectarian militia Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, calls on all Iraqis to stand up and throw Daash out of Iraq. He refers to Daash as being cowardly and that the government of Iraq will support any group fighting the terrorists.
4th Sep: Villagers in Tal Ali burn a Daash flag and a position of Daash after Daash fighters leave the area. Daash later returns in force and kidnaps 25 villagers.

Related:
2nd Sep: Saudi Arabia arrests 88 of its nationals on terrorism charges and referred to them as having “misguided ideology” and as being those that “glorify terrorist acts.”
Some of those arrested had been prisoners earlier and had been released after going through Saudi Arabia’s Deqaidafication program.
2nd Sep: Israeli sense of humour, predictably based on productivity: Israel announces plans to develop a colony on land it occupied in the West Bank; as much as 400 hectares. The reason for stealing the land was that the Palestinians were not cultivating it with the required intensity.
3rd Sep: Egyptian Religious Athority, the Dar Al Ifta, issues a fatwa against online fraternizing between men and women. The Fatwa reads “as many experiences in our present time prove that this opens the door for evil and frivolity, an entrance for Satan, and is a source of corruption and sedition.” A similar ruling by Iran’s Khamenie also exists.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/03/egypt-s-fatwa-against-tinder-clerics-ban-online-chatting.html
3rd Sep: Bosnia arrests 16 individuals accused of collecting funds and recruiting fighters to fight for Daash in Syria and Iraq.
4th Sep: Canadian nationals that joined Al Qaida were involved in the interrogation of US journalists Theo Curtis and Matt Schrier. The captors are also believed to have sent the family members of the hostages letters purporting to be from the hostages, stolen money from the accounts of the hostages, and bought electronic equipment from Ebay using stolen funds. Every single act is contrary to Islam.
4th Sep: Going Native: 100 or more Americans fighting on the side of Daash:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2014/09/03/hagel-100-americans-have-joined-isis.html
4th Sep: US Internet Companies have decided to remove videos and images being posted by Jihadists. The reason they state is that they do not want to become instruments of (enemy-my word) propaganda.
4th Sep: How to be an Asshole: Pakistani Cricketer Ahmed Shehzad tells Sri Lankan Cricket player Tillakarante Dilshan to convert to Islam and go to heaven.
4th Sep: Al Qaeda has established a new branch for the Indian sub continent. Its head is going to be Pakistani Asim Umar and it will concentrate on the regions of Kashmir, Ahmadabad, Assam, and Burma. The sub continent has seen a huge growth in Wahabism with many traditional Orthodox Sunni Muslims becoming the minority. The Petro Dollar has financed a large number of Mosques, Trusts, and Madarsas in the region.
4th Sep: Iranian intelligence reports having thwarted attempts by foreign intelligence services of recruiting Iranian Nuclear Scientists

Further Reading:
Unabashed and to the point: http://takimag.com/article/keep_your_friends_close_unless_theyre_in_washington_taki#axzz3CJtZwLgq
The Women of Daash:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/03/the-bride-of-isis-revealed.html
Bhadrakumar:
http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/2014/09/02/nato-dressing-up-raring-to-go/
http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/2014/09/03/islamic-state-and-the-afghan-analogy/

Short Analysis: 1700 dead Shia service men, who is responsible? Daash or Maliki?
This is a very short analysis. But the links are very interesting. This first explains the fall of Northern Iraq and the complete mismanagement by Maliki. Maliki has tried to conceal his complete incompetence by referring to it as a conspiracy:
http://musingsoniraq.blogspot.in/2014/08/how-northern-iraq-fell-to-insurgency.html
This second talks about the way in which the 1700 Shia service men were executed. As commander of the Iraqi Security Forces and after having the power and authority to pick his commanders, Maliki is directly responsible for the manner in which the base was evacuated and the 1700 recruits literally led to their deaths.
http://rt.com/news/184893-isis-mass-execution-iraq/
In the last part of this article it can be seen how Maliki is still trying to hold on to power by pushing his favourites for key ministries:
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/us-special-operations-forces-fighting-iraq
I am glad Maliki has gone. But if one of my relatives had died at Spykar because of this bureaucrat’s incompetence, I would want to take more than just power from him.

Who Are The Boko Haram?

by Fulan Nasrullah

Good question. Most people find it hard to navigate through the confusing myriad of stories about Boko Haram. Especially .the lies and half-truths and outright ignorance propagated by contemporary Main Stream Media (MSM) as ‘facts’.

To understand what these people are one needs access to them. Apart from Shekau, the rest of the Boko Haram are publicity wary, viewing it as a distraction to their ’cause’ so knowing them tends to get a bit difficult

And then there is the government. You know too much about the Boko Haram, you are a Boko Haram operative or a sympathizer, and its off with your head a la Alice in Wonderland style. So one tends to be cautious albeit a little bit paranoid about what in can say or even hear.

However what is clear that I can pass along is this.

There are four groups, three of whom are allied to each other. They are namely:
1. Jamaa’atu Ahlis-Sunnah Lid-Da’wati Wal-Jihaad of Abubakar Shekau

2. Jamaa’atu Ahlis-Sunnah Ahlis-Sunnah Lid-Da’wati Wal-Jihaad of Sheikh Bukar Al-Barnawi

…. Group of the People of The Sunnah(Traditions) For the Call/Propagation (Evangelism) and The Struggling/Striving

3. Ansorul-Muslimiina Fii Bilaadis-Sudan led by Abu Usamah Al-Ansori

….. Helpers Of The Muslims In The Lands of The Sudan (Sudan is a classical Arabic term referring to the entire part of Muslim Africa that runs from Senegal and the Atlantic to the Ethiopia-Sudan border. Some historians also include Ethiopia and Somalia up to the Juba and Shabelle regions in it

4. Haraktul-Muhajiriina wal-Mujahidiin led by Khalid Al-Barnawi.

Movement of Those Who Have Migrated and Those Who Are Striving……..

Origins….

These four groups all originated from the students of Muhammad Yusuf who survived the 2009 Conflict in Maiduguri which was badly mismanaged by the government. They first called to seek revenge for the massacre of several thousand of innocent residents of Maiduguri and the extra-Judicial murder of Sheikh Yusuf.

Their call has metamorphosed into a whole different reason for fighting

Ideology…..

They are Yusufiyya. They follow strictly the teachings of Muhammad Yusuf. However the group of Shekau is becoming more Takfiri and leaving the Yusufiyyah Ideology and this is causing estrangement between it and the other three groups.

They are Yusufiyyah Sunnis I.e Sunnis on the Aqeedah (Creed) of Muhammad Yusuf and the Manhaj(Methodology) of Thaurah fil-Jihad (Revolution In Striving) to the core. They can stand Ikhwanis since they revere Qutb and Al-Banna.

However, the three other groups I.e Jamaa’atu Ahlis-Sunnah of Sheikh Bukar Al-Barnawi, Harakatul-Muhajiriin of Khalid Al-Barnawi and Ansorul-Muslimiin of Abu Usamah Al-Ansori despise Ikhwanul-Muslimiin (Muslim Brotherhood) because the Ikhwan participate in democracy and protest which the Yusufiyyah reject.

Their Views Of Al-Baghdadi…..

Shekau and his group have links with Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi and his group that date back to May/June 2014 when a delegation from Shekau arrived in Ar-Raqqoh in Syria to seek an agreement of cooperation with Al-Baghdadi and his then Islamic State of Iraq and Sham. The agreement was reached and half a dozen technical advisors from the ISIS are said to have come to Nigeria via Chad and Cameroon to train Shekau’s forces. Apart from those technical no substantial support from Al-Baghdadi flowed to Shekau.

While Shekau obviously admires Baghdad, it I unclear so far if he has pledged loyalty to Al-Baghdadi’s Islamic State yet or if he is even willing to go that far.

The other three groups take a radically different view of Al-Baghdadi, deriding him as an ‘adventurer’ and a ‘bloodthirsty descendant of Al-Hajjaj Bin Yusuf’ and as ‘one who calls to misguidance’.

Shekau’s association with Al-Baghdadi and his adopting of the Takfiri code of Al-Baghdadi’s Islamic State has caused the other three groups to be wary of him and to band together in case they may need to fight him in the future.

What Are They Fighting For….

I must confess a lack of complete knowledge of what they are fighting for.

Shekau’s objective is totally indiscernible to me. If he wants to conquer the whole Nigeria or just a part, I simply cannot tell.

The others wanted revenge for 2009(Sheikh Bukar Al-Barnawi), defence of Muslims against the alleged plots of Christian Association of Nigeria and the fanatic neo-Zionist churches that are found in Northern Nigeria e.g ECWA (Evangelical Communion Of West Africa and COCIN (Church of Christ In Nigeria) with islamophobic ideologies and known consorts of Israel’s Mossad (Sheikh Abu Usamah Al-Ansori), and joining the global Jihad against the enemies of Islam (America and pro- American Muslim regimes) and waging Jihad to protect Muslim lands (Khalid Al-Barnawi), respectively.

Now buoyed on by their fast growing strength, their increasing numbers, their easy victories and their increasing arsenal, they are no longer fighting fr the mundane causes of the past. They (especially Khalid Al-Barnawi and Abu Usamah Al-Ansori) believe they can defeat the Nigerian Army and overthrow the current system of government and establish an Islamic Union/State/Emirate of Nigeria or something like that based on their rule and their ideas. They see this war as a long struggle that they will fight one village at a time until the whole of Nigeria is under their heel willingly or unwillingly.
Before they took Gwoza, negotiations were possible in fact they were calling for negotiations. But after the ease of defending Damboa, retaking Gamboru-Ngala, seizing Madagali and chasing Nigerian troops into Cameroon, they are confident that in the long run they can and will win.

Pauvre, pauvre France!

It appears that Francois Holland, aka "soft testicle" (nickname given to him by Martine Aubry, First Secretary of the Socialist Party of France), has outdone even Tony Blair as the US's most docile poodle in Europe.  After resisting US pressure for a long time and being fined billions of dollars for doing so, he has suddenly decided to cave in and suspend the delivery of the French Mistrals to Russia.  However, not will the US will not return to 9 billion dollars extorted out of Paribas, now the Russian can impose astronomical penalties on France for breach of contract.  Double whammy for Hollande!

Now I suspect that this is a measure which will last exactly as long as the upcoming NATO summit and that as soon it is over the "circumstances for delivery" will magically become "right again".  As for Russia - no worries.  She will either get the ships or get a huge load of money.  A win-win situation for sure
 
But that is hardly the point.

First, whether Russia really needs these French ships is an extremely controversial issue in Russia, especially in the military.  I did not take a poll, but my guess is that most of the military don't want them and rather spend the money elsewhere.  This was a Medvedev purchase which was far from having a unanimity behind it.  Personally, I think that the Mistrals are very good ships, very versatile, and that Russia could use on in the Black Sea and one in the Far East.   They also come at at time with the Russian shipbuilding industry is over-worked and does not have the capacity to fulfill all the orders of the Russian Navy.  Finally, the Mistrals come with an advanced communication and command infrastructure which the Russian would like to get their hands one.  But I have always had a weak spot for French weapon systems and nobody asked me my opinion anyway.  Besides, there are cheaper way for Russian to get that kind of capabilities or systems.

I think that the real importance of the Mistral contact was to show Russia, France and the rest of the world that the two countries could work together, even on huge contracts, that France is a credibly supplier and that the Russian and French military industrial complexes can cooperate.

Now the French look like total whips and idiots.

That is really unfair.  The French deserve a great deal of credit for doing everything just right, sining such a complex agreement is no small task, and for designing a superb ship.  Now all this is compromised by Francois "soft testicle" Hollande who clearly has the vision, courage, intelligence and leadership qualities of a blue-green algae.

I bet you the ships will be delivered more or less on time.  But a terrible blow has been dealt to one of values the French hold extremely dear: the independence of their country from all other big powers.  If the British are more or less resigned to their role as janitor for Uncle Sam, the French will not accept this and I expect the hatred for the current regime to become even more virulent than it is today.  I tend to agree with French economist Pierre Jovanovic when he predicts that "King Francois" (another of his nicknames) will never finish his term in office.

Pauvre, pauvre France...

The Saker

AngloZionist: Short primer for the newcomers

"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize"

Voltaire

Dear new-to-this blog friends,

Why do I speak of "AngloZionists"?  I got that question many times in the past, so I will make a separate post about it to (hopefully) explain this once and for all.

1) Anglo:

The USA in an Empire.  With roughly 1000 overseas bases (depends on how you count), a undeniably messianic ideology, a bigger defense offense budget then the rest of the planet combined, 16+ spy agencies, the dollar as work currency there is no doubt that the US is a planetary Empire.  Where did the US Empire come from?  Again, that's a no brainer - from the British Empire.  Furthermore, the US Empire is really based on a select group of nations: the Echelon countries, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and, of course, the US.  What do these countries have in common?  They are the leftovers of the British Empire and they are all English speaking.  Notice that France, Germany or Japan are not part of this elite even though they are arguably as important or more to the USA then, say, New Zealand and far more powerful.  So the "Anglo" part is undeniable.  And yet,
even though "Anglo" is an ethnic/linguistic/cultural category while "Zionist" is a political/ideological one, very rarely do I get an objection about speaking of "Anglos" or the "Anglosphere".

2) Zionist

Let's take the (hyper politically correct) Wikipedia definition of what the word "Zionism" means: it is "a nationalist movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the creation of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the Land of Israel".  Apparently, no link to the US, the Ukraine or Timbuktu, right?  But think again.  Why would Jews - whether defined as a religion or an ethnicity - need a homeland anyway?  Why can't they just live wherever they are born, just like Buddhist (a religion) or the African Bushmen (ethnicity) who live in many different countries?  The canonical answer is that Jews have been persecuted everywhere and that therefore they need their own homeland to serve as a safe haven in case of persecutions.  Without going into the issue of why Jews were persecuted everywhere and, apparently, in all times, this rationale clearly implies if not the inevitability of more persecutions or, at the very least, a high risk thereof.  Let's accept that for demonstration sake and see what this, in turn, implies.  First, that implies that Jews are inherently threatened by non-Jews who are all at least potential anti-Semites. The threat is so severe that a separate Gentile-free homeland must be created as the only, best and last way to protect Jews worldwide.  This, in turn, implies that the continued existence of this homeland should become an vital and irreplaceable priority of all Jews worldwide lest a persecution suddenly breaks out and they have nowhere to go.  Furthermore, until all Jews finally "move up" to Israel, they better be very, very careful as all the goyim around them could literally come down with a sudden case of genocidal anti-Semitism at any moment.  Hence all the anti-anti-Semitic organizations a la ADL or UEJF, the Betar clubs, the network of sayanim, etc.  In other words, far from being a local "dealing with Israel only" phenomenon, Zionism is a worldwide movement whose aim is to protect Jews from the apparently incurable anti-Semitism of the rest of the planet.  As Israel Shahak correctly identified it, Zionism postulates that Jews should "think locally and act globally" and when given a choice of policies always ask THE crucial question: "But is it good for Jews?".  So far from being only focused on Israel, Zionism is really a global, planetary, ideology which unequivocally split up all of mankind into two groups (Jews and Gentiles), which assumes that the latter are all potential genocidal maniacs (which is racist) and believes that saving Jewish lives is qualitatively different and more important than saving Gentile lives (which is racist again).  Anyone doubting the ferocity of this determination should either ask a Palestinian or study the holiday of Purim, or both.  Even better, read Gilad Atzmon and look up his definition of what is brilliantly called "pre-traumatic stress disorder"

3) Anglo-Zionist

The British Empire and the early USA used to be pretty much wall to wall Anglo.  Sure, Jews had a strong influence (in banking for example), but Zionism was a non-issue not only amongst non-Jews, but also amongst US Jews.  Besides, religious Jews were often very hostile to the notion of a secular Israel while secular Jews did not really care about this quasi Biblical notion.  WWII definitely gave a massive boost to the Zionist movement while, as Norman Finkelstein explained it, the topic of the "Holocaust" became central to Jewish discourse and identity only many years later.  I won't go into the history of the rise to power of Jews in the USA, but from roughly Ford to GW Bush's Neocons it has been steady.  And even though Obama initially pushed them out, they came right back in through the backdoor.  Right now, the only question is whether US Jews have more power than US Anglos or the other way around.  Before going any further, let me also immediately say that I am not talking about Jews or Anglos as a group, but I am referring to the top 1% within each of these groups.  Furthermore, I don't believe that the top 1% of Jews cares any more about Israel or the 99% of Jews than the top 1% of Anglos care about the USA or the Anglo people.  So, here my thesis:

The US Empire is run by a 1% (or less) elite which can be called the "deep state" which is composed of two main groups: Anglos and Jews.  These two groups are in many ways hostile to each other (just like the SS and SA or Trotskysts and Stalinists), but they share 1) a racist outlook on the rest of mankind 2) a messianic ideology 3) a phenomenal propensity for violence 4) an obsession with money and greed and its power to corrupt.  So they work together almost all the time.

Now this might seem basic, but so many people miss it, that I will have to explicitly state it: to say that most US elites are Anglos or Jews does not mean that most Anglos or Jews are part of the US elites.  That is a straw-man argument which deliberately ignores the non commutative property of my thesis to turn it into a racist statement which accuses most/all Anglos or Jews of some evil doing.  So to be very clear:

When I speak of AngloZionist Empire I am referring to the predominant ideology of the 1%ers elites which for this Empire's "deep state".

By the way, there are non-Jewish Zionists (Biden, in his own words) and there are (plenty of) anti-Zionist Jews.  Likewise, there are non-Anglo imperialists and there are (plenty of) anti-imperialists Anglos.  To speak of "Nazi Germany" or "Soviet Russia" does in now way imply that all Germans were Nazis or all Russian s Communists.  All this means it that the predominant ideology of these nations at that specific moment in time was National-Socialism and Marxism, that's all.

My personal opinion now

First, I don't believe that Jews are a race or an ethnicity.  I always doubted that, but reading Shlomo Sand really convinced me.  Jews are not defined by religion either (most/many are  secular).  Truly, Jews are a tribe.  A group one can chose to join (Elizabeth Taylor) or leave (Gilad Atzmon).  In other words, I see "Jewishness" as a culture, or ideology, or education or any other number of things, but not something rooted in biology.  I fully agree with Atzmon when he says that Jews are racist, but not a race.  Second, I don't even believe that the concept of  "race" has been properly defined and, hence, that it has any objective meaning.  I therefore don't differentiate between human beings on the basis of an undefined criterion.  Third, since being Jew (or not) is a choice, one to belong, adhere and endorse a tribe (secular Jews) or a religion (Judaics).  Any choice implies a judgment call and it therefore a legitimate target for scrutiny and criticism.  Fourth, I believe that Zionism, even when secular, instrumentalizes the values, ideas, myths and ethos of rabbinical Judaism (aka "Talmudism" or "Phariseism") and both are racist in their core value and assumptions. Fifth, both Zionism and Nazism are twin brothers born from the same ugly womb: 19th century European nationalism (Brecht was right, "’The belly is still fertile from which the foul beast sprang").  Nazis and Zionists can hate each other to their hearts' content, but they are still twins.  Sixth, I reject any and all form of racism as a denial of our common humanity, a denial of the freedom of choice of each human being and - being an Orthodox Christian - as a grievous heresy.  To me people who chose to identify themselves with, and as, Jews are not inherently different from any other human and they deserve no more and no less rights and protections than any other human being.

I will note here that while the vast majority of my readers of Anglos, they almost never complain about the "Anglo" part of my "AngloZionist" descriptor.  The vast majority of objections focus on the "Zionist" part.  You might want to think long and hard about why this is so and what it tells us about the kind of power Zionists have over the prevailing ideology.  Could it be linked to the reason why the (openly racist and truly genocidal) Israeli Prime Minister gets more standing ovations in Congress (29) than the US President (25)?

Some objections:

Q: it makes you sound like a Nazi/redneck/racist/idiot/etc.
A: I don't care.  I don't write this blog for brainwashed zombies.

Q: you turn people off.
A: if by speaking the truth and using correct descriptors I turn them off, then this blog is not for them.

Q: you can offend Jews.
A: only those who believe that their ideas cannot be challenged or criticized.

Q: but you will lose readers!!
A: this is not a popularity contest.

Q: your intentions might be good, but they are easily misinterpreted.
A: this is why I define my words very carefully and strictly.

Q: but why are you so stubborn about this?
A: because I am sick and tired of those in power hiding in the dark: let's expose them and freely challenge them.  How can you challenge something which is hidden?

Q: but I am a hasbarachnik and I need to get you to stop using that expression!!
A: give it up and find an easier target for your efforts.  You will still get paid.

A: I have a much better term.
Q: Good!  Use it on your blog then :-P

That's it for now.

Actually no, there is one more thing, while I am at it:

Open message to those objecting to my use of the article 'the' in front of the word "Ukraine": before lecturing others, learn Russian and learn a little something about the history of the Ukraine :-P

In conclusion, a plea: can we pretty please stop this nonsense now?  There are far more important things to analyze and worry about than my use of this or that expression, word or description.  If you don't like it - great.  Just consider that I am wrong (-: I often am, so I won't take offense :-).  Can we please stop pretending like Jews and Jewish related issues are The Most Important Thing In The Universe (TMITITU) and deal with the really important issues?

Thanks,

The Saker

PS: IMPORTANT ADDENDUM: you are more than welcome to comment discuss this topic all you want, but I have wasted enough of my time on this kind of nonsense.  Not being a Jew myself, I don't have to share in any ethnocentric notion of exceptionalism and self-aggrandizement and this is why I said that the topic of Jews and Jewish issues is not TMITITU, at least not for me. So I will not respond to comments to this post, sorry.  Careful though - I still loathe racism in all its forms, including anti-Jewish racism (even if Jews are not a race!), so don't bother posting long anti-Jewish rants as I will toss them all to /dev/null.  Fact based, logical and otherwise substantive comments are, of course, not only welcome, but requested.  Racist shit, pardon my French, is not.

Russia Today vs Ukraine Today (QED)

Saker note: will be gone all day - open thread

Dear friend,

Monday I will be on the road all day.  God willing, I will be back in the evening.  In the meantime - enjoy an open thread.  Cheers,

The Saker

Novorussia: independent, associated or (con)federated?

An important disclaimer, caveat and clarification

First, I will begin by a clear disclaimer which I ask you all to please carefully read and then keep in mind: I personally am not advocating any option for the final status of Novorussia.  That is for the people of Novorussia to decide and any option that they will chose I will support.  Furthermore, at this point in time I am not even personally sure what option I would recommend if asked to do so simply because the devil is in the details, not the big words.  What I propose to do below is to look at a number of issues related to this question but that analysis should not be interpreted as a personal endorsement of any solution.

Second, I have carefully parsed the news out of Minsk, Novorussia and Russia and I am left with the strong feeling that nothing has really been decided, hence the apparent zig-zags and changing interpretations over the terms offered by the Novorussian delegation.

Third, I urge everybody to be extremely cautious with Russian news sources including Russian TV channels and RT.  Why?  Because Russia has a major stake in this fight and that I am absolutely certain that the Russian elites are split on what the best solution would be for Russia.  There are also informal, shall we say, "groups of like-minded people" inside the Russian media who are trying to promote the interest of their patrons and supporters.  And while it is would be an oversimplification to say that, for example, NTV stands for "position A" while RT stands for "position B", I know for a fact that inside RT, NTV, Rossia, REN-TV and the rest of various groups have various agendas: one editorial board might have a very different position than another one, even inside the same media outlet.

Fourth, Russian interests should not be automatically conflated with the interests of Novorussia, just as the interests of the Russian and Novorussian elites should not be conflated with the interests of the Russian and Novorussian people.  Seems obvious, but I feel that this should be clearly stated again because any agreement on the final status of Novorussia will be the resulting vector of the goals many very different interests groups and almost certainly end up being a compromise from which nobody will walk away with everything they want.

Having said that, now let's look at how this all began.

How did we get here?

Six months ago all the eastern Ukrainians wanted were a) guarantees for the Russian language and b) fiscal autonomy.  That's it.  Nothing else.  As for Russia, her position was equally clear: a united and neutral Ukraine respectful of the civil rights of all its citizens. Sounds like a no-brainer, right?

As for the Ukrainian opposition, it officially wanted to remove an oligarch-controlled government and sign an Association with the EU.  Again, pretty straightforward.

Now, think of it, a compromise solution was rather obvious: the election of a new, non-oligarch controlled government which would sign an Association agreement with the EU and commit itself to the civil rights of all Ukrainians, including the cultural and linguistic rights of the eastern Ukrainians.  Yanukovich even went as far as to offer Iatseniuk the post of Prime Minister.  So why did it not happen?

Because the protest movement was completely co-opted, hijacked, manipulated, controlled, financed, organized and run by the USA who used EU political elites and a group of bona fide Nazis to achieve regime change and draw the Ukraine into the AngloZionist sphere of influence.  What they wanted was a Ukraine economically exploited by the EU and militarily owned by the US via NATO.  This plan centered on not only severing away the Ukraine from Russia and its economic union with Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia and others, but to also on severing the economic ties between Russia and Europe (an old US goal dating from the Cold War when the US did everything it could to prevent the USSR from selling gas to western Europe).

You can think of the Nazi freaks as the Ukie equivalent of al-Qaeda or ISIS: rabid hateful murderous lunatics who literally cannot contain their hatred and desire to oppress and murder.  Of course, under US pressure, they tried very hard to act like sane and civilized people, but time and again they failed, hence the references to Russian speakers as sub-humans/non-humans, Timoshenko's desire to use nukes to exterminate the "accursed Moskals", the apparently crazy insistence that only Ukrainian be an official language or the equally imbecile categorical refusal of any form of federation.  Needless to say, as soon as these crazies got to power, they immediately passed a series of fantastically stupid and provocative laws such as the re-authorization of Nazi propaganda or the repeal of the official status of the Russian language.  Unsurprisingly, the folks in the east freaked out and correctly concluded that "the Nazis are back".

As a result, a double dynamic was created: the crazies in the USA (the Neocons) directly threatened the vital/existential interests of Russia while the crazies in Kiev (the Nazis) directly threatened the vital/existential interests of the population of eastern and southern Ukraine.  In doing so they left the Donbass and Russia no other option than to react and directly respond to that danger.

This is important because what has been done cannot be simply wished away and undone.  Both Russia and Novorussia are now in a "survival mode" in which nothing short of a full elimination of these vital/existential threats will do.  In other words, the US Empire's AngloZionist project AND the Ukie Nazi experiment must absolutely and definitely be defeated and conditions must be created which will forever prevent it's reemergence.

Where do we stand now?

First, I would argue that the Junta repression force (JRF) has been defeated.  Not strategically (if only because it enjoys an immense strategic depth and still huge human and material resources), but operationally.  All the signs are that the Novorussian Armed Forces (NAF) are careful not to over-play their hand or push too far to the west, so things look very good for Novorussia right now.  Second, the Junta has also been defeated politically: if in the past the Ukrainian people had an oligarch-controlled government, now they have a government of oligarchs.  And they know it.  Furthermore, the Nazis have shown their true face (Odessa, Mariupol, MH17, MLRS and ballistic missiles used on civilians with white phosphor and cluster munitions, etc.).  Third, predictably, the Ukie economy is in free fall and for all practical purposes the Ukie industry is dead.  I would call that a full-spectrum failure for the Junta.

Uncle Sam is not doing much better: Crimea is lost forever, the Donbass is also lost for all practical purpose, Putin is more popular than ever, the EU tensions with the US are up (the Czech and Slovak republics have both announced that they will veto any further sanctions against Russia), and the US puppet-junta in Kiev has completely lost control of the situation.

art by Josetxo Ezcurra

As for the EU, it truly screwed-up badly.  The recent election of Donald Tusk and Federica Mogherini to the positions of President of the EU Council and EU Foreign Policy Chief is definitely good news, but it is also too little too late.  The mess left behind by Catherine Ashton and Herman Van Rompuy will take years of painful efforts to clear.  Besides, that other crazy, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, is still there, every bit as crazy and pathetic as always.  But for all the hot air blowing out of Rasmussen and a few more EU politicians, the EU has no stomach for more sanctions, much less so an ugly sanctions war with Russia.  The Russians know that, and so all they have to do now is wait for the fruit to become ripe (or rotten, really) and fall down on their lap.

There will be a NATO summit next week in Wales were Obama and his Neocon coterie of foreign policy advisors will most definitely push for a series of anti-Russian measure backed by very loud and macho statement about how Russia must be stopped, Europe protected and the NATO recognized as absolutely indispensable.  More men, more guns, more threats and, last but not least, more dollars for the US military-industrial complex.  Russia, however, will remain unimpressed for a very simple reason: the US and the EU have already been at the maximal anti-Russian policies for many years already.  In fact, the only anti-Russian policies which the AngloZionist Empire has not adopted yet are those which would hurt it more than they would hurt Russia.  Put differently, from now on any anti-Russian sanctions adopted will, by definition, hurt the AngloZionists more than they will hurt Russia (which they still will, of course).  The conclusion is obvious: the West simply cannot afford a sustained sanctions war against Russia.

There is still a real danger out there

The problem with the AngloZionists is that they are arrogant and stupid enough to stumble into a variant of the Israeli "Samson Option": to strike out at their enemy even if that means bringing down the entire building on themselves.  Contrary to many analysts, I don't think that the Americans are actually dumb enough to deliberately start a war against Russia, much less so a nuclear one, but they are arrogant enough to paint themselves into a corner in which the only way to save face is to use military force.  They are also capable of creating an extremely dangerous military situation in which even a firecracker can set off a shooting war (remember the insane USN posturing in the Strait of Hormuz or in the Taiwan Strait?).  The Russians must absolutely remain aware of this danger and thus never assume that the Americans are rational or prudent.  History proves that they are reckless and happy to create a situation resulting in war (US policies towards Japan before WWII are a perfect example).

Now let's look at the options for Novorussia

As I have mentioned already, the devil is in the details, but there are basically to main options for Novorussia  1) full (de facto and de jure) independence 2) practical (de facto but not de jure) independence. I honestly believe that any other option which would fall short of de facto independence is simply impossible to achieve.  The Novorussians will not live under Kiev's police or military, they will not pay Kiev more than purely symbolic taxes and they will most definitely not accept any limitation of their cultural, linguistic and economic rights, including the right to do business directly with Russia.  I consider that option as so unlikely, short of a massive and sustain bloodbath, that I won't even consider it any further.  So let's look at the two remaining options.

a) Full (de facto and de jure) independence: Novorussia

Advantages: Security: possibility to either join Russia or sign a mutual assistance treaty which could include the basing of Russian forces in Novorussia.  This would provide the ideal and maximal protection from any future attacks from the Ukies.  Economy: no taxes paid to Kiev, association with Russia, full access to the huge Eurasian market, work for the Russian industry, social rights paid for by Russia (as part of an aid package).  The joy of having fully won and to not have to deal with the crazies in the western Ukraine.  Full and total de-Nazification.

Disadvantages: maximalist position which leave no face saving way out for the crazies in Kiev and Washington, major difficulties in being internationally recognized.  This option also leaves all the rest of the ex-Ukraine in the hands of the AngloZionists and Nazis who will constantly sabotage, subvert and disrupt the life of Novorussia.  There is a real chance that this might mean leaving cities and regions like Odessa, Dniepropetrovsk, Kharkov, Chernigov, Nikolaev and many other historically Russian part of the ex-Ukraine to whatever regime is in power in Kiev.  Constant military danger: the current Ukie Minister of Defense promised a victory parade for the Ukie forces in Sevastopol, I kid you not.  You can imagine what folks like him will have to say to an independent Novorussia.  Key problem: this maximalist position leave no incentive whatsoever for Kiev to negotiate.

b) Practical (de facto but not de jure) independence: "Ukraine v2"

Advantages: Novorussia already gets much more than what it wanted six months ago (see above).  By preserving the fiction of a unitary Ukraine this solution leaves everybody a face saving way out and the major outside actors (Russia, US, EU, UN, OSCE) can all sign the deal and be declared guarantors.  Also, if Novorussia is nominally part of the "Ukraine v2" then it gives the people of the eastern Ukraine (who are the richest, best educated majority of the Ukrainian population) a chance to counter-act and challenge the rule of Nazis in Kiev and maybe serve as a basis to bring down the current "Banderastan" and replace it instead with a "Ukraine v2".  Furthermore, a united Ukraine would be in a much better position to receive desperately needed international aid and money to rebuild.  Considering that at least initially the Nazi freaks would remain in power in Kiev we can be pretty sure that they will further destroy even the little left of "Banderastan" and that, sooner or later, some regime change will occur.  If the new regime in power is more or less sane, the eastern Ukraine could demand that those responsible for the mess be brought to trial and that a "truth and reconciliation" type commission be formed. 

Disadvantages: There is a real risk that the Poroshenko regime will fall and be replaced by a Iarosh dictatorship.  Alternatively, southern Banderastan might break away from Kiev and for a "Kolomoiskistan".  Either way, the collapse of the Poroshenko regime risks sucking in the Donbass into a 2nd phase of the civil war with no option for overt Russian aid (covert aid would, of course, be provided).  Even the notion of being represented by Nazi freaks in Kiev or to put up with a Ukie flag would be sickening for all those who died in defense of Novorussia.  Furthermore, if the deal does not look solid or stable, far from coming back home from Russia, even more Novorussians would "vote with their feet" and emigrate to Russia.  Nowadays, even the people of Crimea are still nervous and Russian politicians, including Putin, have had to constantly tell them "no, this time it's forever, we will never abandon you, this is not something which will ever be overturned".  If the folks in Crimea are worried about their future even though they are now legally part of Russia, you can imagine how frightened and unsure the people of Novorussia would be in any kind of "association" with Kiev, even a purely formal one.

These are only a few examples, there are many more which could be listed as advantages and disadvantages for both the independent Novorussia and the "Ukraine v2" option.

My very highly speculative and personal guess

Russia's preferred option

I think that Russia would prefer a Ukraine v2 version.  From the point of view of Russia, it has a lot of advantages (like forcing the "Ukraine v2" to adopt a completely neutral, non-aligned, status).  As I have always said, Russia does not want or need the Ukraine.  What it wants is a stable, neutral and prosperous Ukraine, and not because Putin and the rest of the folks in the Kremlin are saints or Ukrainophiles, but because that is for the objective best interest for Russia.  The only thing Russia needed it already got: Crimea.

To those of you who might be appalled at the notion of a less-than-fully-independent Novorussia or a "Ukraine v2" I will say that I very much doubt that Russia can impose such an outcome on the people of Novorussia.  Sure, I am not naive, Zakharchenko and current Novorussian leaders got their power in a Moscow-backed change of leadership, so their ties to Moscow are very close, but the real power of Zakharchenko & Co. is that they have the support and consensus of the vast majority of the people of Novorussia, especially those fighting in the NAF.  I never believed in a "sellout" of Novorussia (even though I always feared it), and I am confident that should such a "sellout" occur the only real force in Novorussia - the NAF - will never let it happen.  Likewise any such "sellout" would trigger a severe political crisis for Putin.

All this is to say that while I do believe that, given the choice and option, Putin and his advisors would prefer a de-facto but not fully de-jure semi-independent Novorussia inside a very loose "Ukraine v2" I do not believe that a "sellout" is either what they want or even something they could do: the ultimate guarantor of the de-facto independence of Novorussia is not Putin or Russia, but the armed men of the NAF.

Novorussia's preferred option

What would the people of Novorussia and, especially, the NAF prefer?

I honestly don't know but I suppose that full independence is their preferred goal.  Still, the situation is complex and there are very solid argument speaking against such an option and for a "Ukraine v2" (as there very are solid arguments speaking in favor of a fully independent Novorussia and against a "Ukraine v2").

One could also make a case that right now is not the correct time to make this choice.  For one thing, nobody knows who will be in power in Kiev in just a few months.  The winter is coming and the gas negotiations are becoming huge. Depending on what NATO does or does not decide, one of the other option might become a clearly better choice (just imagine NATO forces in Kiev!).

We have to give time to time (French expression)

The examples of Korea, Cyprus, Kosovo, Transnistria and many others show that sometimes the only solution is not solution at all.  The examples of Ireland or Chechnia show that some solutions are not at all the ones initially considered.  Furthermore, I would want to add here that the real end-goal of Russia in the Ukraine is not getting Crimea or saving the Donbass, but to achieve real regime change in Kiev.  Only that option would be an outcome which would really please Moscow and, if we keep that in mind, it is not at all clear to me that full independence for Novorussia is the best way to get there.  And let us also ponder this question: what is better for the people of Novorussia, full independence from the Ukraine or real, lasting, regime change in Kiev?

Just as in chess, time and timing are crucial pieces on the board.  Those who over the past few months were hysterically accusing Putin of being a traitor who will backstab the Novorussians simply failed to appreciate the importance of time and timing in strategy.  I am sorry to say that, no offense intended, but many people in the West have been raised, educated and trained in a culture of instant action-reaction, of immediate, almost kneejerk, responses.  They are used to consider only short-term rapidly achievable options.  Russia, and even more so China, are very different in this prospect.  These two nations build their immense countries by slow and steady progress, not by short pushes.  And though the Russian in the street might also prefer a fast solution to the Ukrainian problem, the folks in the Kremlin, especially former intelligence officers like Putin, fully realize that the "Ukrainian problem" is 400 to 800 years old, depending on how you define it (please read this and this if you are interested) and that it will not be solved in a few months.  This is especially true considering that in the current situation the real cause and force behind the current Ukrainian crisis is the AngloZionist Empire.

The real, "real", goal of Putin (and Xi Jinping!)

As I have mentioned it here many, many times, the real "real" end-goal of Russia is not even regime change in Kiev: it is regime change on the planet.  There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that both Russia and China want to create a New World Order, but one very different one from the one envisioned by Bush, Fukuyama, Obama and the rest of the AngloZionist 1%ers.  Russia and China want a complete deconstruction of the AngloZionist Empire, they want to de-dollarize the world economy, the want an multi-polar international world order in which the rule of law is respected because it is understood that it is the most advantageous way to deal with problems.  Russia see its future in her North and in Siberia, China wants its economy to go global, including the Far-East Asia and the Pacific region, Africa and Latin America.  Russia also wants to role of Latin America and Central Asia to become more important because without these continents and regions there can be no truly multi-polar world.  I would also argue that both Russia and China are rejecting the western civilizational model and it's key dogmas (I won't list them here lest I offend or infuriate new readers, but my longtime readers know exactly what I mean) and that they are both seeking to create not only a different world order but a different civilization.  All this is much, much bigger than the Donbass or even the entire Ukraine.  Yes, at this moment in time, the frontline of the global civilizational war is going straight across the Ukraine, but this is only one battle in a much bigger and wider war.

Judging by some very telling statements of Zakharchenko in his recent press conference, I am confident that he understands that very well.  I have no doubt whatsoever that Putin does.

Conclusion

The main conclusion I hope that you all will draw from the above is that we should not jump to conclusions and avoid making big sweeping judgments.  If I have convinced you that this is a very tricky, complex and multi-dimensional issue then I am satisfied.  If I get another deluge of one sentence slogans in favor of either option, then I failed.  As I said, I am not sure that anybody really knows were this is all taking us.  For one thing, the Ukies and their western patrons have reneged on every single agreement they have signed since last Fall and there is really no rational reason to expect them to stick to anything they might sign this time.  Or maybe these negotiations will lead nowhere and the chaos and "somalization" of the ex-Ukraine will continue.  The other day Putin said this: "no matter where the US gets involved they always achieve the same result: Libya".  That is quite true and maybe a libyalization of Banderastan needs to happen before everybody comes to his/her senses.  Or maybe, this is terrible to say, is the situation more similar to the one in Chechnia in 1999 when a lot of people had to be simply physically eliminated, killed, before any solution could be found (sadly, but Nazis and Wahabis have that in common that the only way to deal with most of them is to kill them).  I honestly don't know.

So let us keep an eye on this incredibly fluid, complex and dangerous situation and not pretend like it is simple and the solution obvious.

Stay tuned, as always, I will do my best to keep you posted.

Kind regards and many thanks,

The Saker 

PS: this is yet another one of my "written in one shot between several other committments" posts, so please forgive the bad grammar, spelling, syntax and style.  I simply physically do not have the time to correct this. Sorry, gotta run :-)  The Saker

Top Novorussian leaders deny reports that either LPR or DPR were prepared to accept continued political unity with the Ukraine

Both Purgin (vice PM) and Zakharchenko (PM) of DPR issued statements flatly denying the mass media reports that either LPR or DPR were prepared to accept continued political unity with Ukraine.

Purgin: http://dnr.today/news/pervyj-zampred-pravitelstva-dnr-andrej-purgin-oproverg-soobshhenie-ryada-smi-o-yakoby-gotovnosti-soxranit-edinoe-politicheskoe-prostranstvo-ukrainy/ (in Russian)

Zakharchenko: http://www.rusnovosti.ru/news/338737 (in Russian)

(thanks to Gleb Bazov for these links!)

More about this later.

The Saker

Major news out of the Ukraine

This morning there are three huge developments to report.

First, RT reports that:

At talks in the Belarusian capital, the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics have urged Kiev to acknowledge their autonomy within Ukraine, but said they wish to remain an integral part of the country.  LNR and DNR representatives urged the Ukrainian government to end their military operation in the country’s east so that parliamentary and local elections can take place freely.   “The president, government and [parliament] Verkhovna Rada should accept… decrees granting immediate recovery from the humanitarian catastrophe, acknowledging the special status of the territories under the control of the People’s Republics, creating conditions - first of all stopping the ‘anti-terror’ operations - for free elections of local authorities and MPs,” the document with the republics' position reads.  The document also calls on Kiev to guarantee “the right to use the Russian language at an official level on the territories of the People’s Republics.” 

I will write an analysis of this position later today

Second, the Ukie forces near Lugansk have abandoned the airport which is now in total control of the NAF.  This info is confirmed by video footage taken today.

Third, there are very intense battles around the Donetsk airport which is now considered "contested" and neither side is in full control of it.  This indicates that the airport will most likely fall under full NAF control in the next 24 hours max.

Elsewhere, the NAF have shot down a Ukrainian Su-27.  This is significant because the Su-27 is a heavy long range high speed high altitude interceptor and not at all suited for slow speed low altitude close air support missions.  The fact that it was shot down indicates that the Ukies have practically lost their entire close air support aviation.  Two helicopters have also been shot down today.

Stay tuned, I will keep you posted.

The Saker

Glory to the Ukraine!

(The voice of screen screams "Glory to the Ukraine!")