Deputy of the Verkhovna Rada Sergei Sobolev did not rule out the rupture of diplomatic relations between Russia and Ukraine after the incident at the Ukrainian Embassy in Moscow. He stated this to the radio station "Moscow speaking".
During Saturday night, about a hundred young people pelted the Embassy of Ukraine with eggs, and then disappeared. According to a RIA Novosti source in law enforcement, there was no "violent conflict" during the action.
The actions were a response to the events in Odessa, where hundreds of nationalists picketed the building of the Russian Consulate to disrupt the celebration of the Day of Russia.
Sobolev did not consider it and the other incident as something serious, but acknowledged that the cessation of diplomatic relations is "a natural process in such situations."
The Deputy did not specify whether he would continue his work at the Ukrainian Embassy in Moscow after the incident, noting that such decisions should be made by the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko.
Russian Spring, June 11, 2016 Translated from Russian by Tom Winter Near Donetsk a Ukrainian BMP has been destroyed (VIDEO)
In the "neutral" zone, near the villages of Peski and Pervomaisk, Army fighters of the DNR found a Ukrainian BMP-2, which had been firing on on the territory of the Republic. [The BMP is Боевая Машина Пехоты, i.e. "Combat vehicle, infantry." Its 100mm canon has a range of four kilometers. --Tr.] Soldiers of the battalion "Patriot" using a SPG-9 anti-tank rocket-propelled grenade hit the BMP, and the Ukrainian occupants fled. Recovery of the BMP-2 at the location of the unit was not possible, so the company commander decided to destroy it with a missile ATGM, which was done. _____________For two news items about Donetsk recovering, repairing, and using captured equipment, see http://www.fort-russ.com/2015/01/ukrainian-pows-we-will-stay-in-donetsk.html, where mechanics from Ukraine help restore battle-damaged tanks, and http://www.fort-russ.com/2015/01/inside-dprs-war-effort.html, "Ukrainian Army is our biggest supplier" Follow us on Facebook! Follow us on Twitter! Donate!
Deputy of the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada Semen Semenchenko proposed to take citizens of Russia hostage, and then exchange them for detained Ukrainians.
"How to release them? It's simple. The other side is taken prisoner, or rather as hostages, because Russian officers and mercenaries do not have the status of prisoners of war. I think governors know that we have an unofficial mass of groups in the border zone. These people are armed in the "Voentorg", they do not have any relation to our side. And each of our hostages will be exchanged with them," Semenchenko declared on the air of "Schuster Live".
On May 19th, Vyshhorod district court in the Kiev region declared the provision of Semen Semenchenko as commander of a battalion of special purpose military units illegal, as he did not serve in the Armed forces and did not take the military oath.
Russian officials have repeatedly stated that Russia is not a party to the armed conflict in Donbass.
According to participants, it was a reaction to the thwarted reception at the Consulate General of Russia in Odessa by Ukrainian nationalists.
A civil correspondent from "Ridus" reported that about two hundred people gathered at the Ukrainian Embassy to express their dissatisfaction. The action was purely peaceful, people chanting slogans like "fascism will not pass", holding banners in their hands. On Twitter, meanwhile, there were allegations that the Embassy was pelted with eggs.
The project "60sec" published, in a traditional minute, a YouTube video about the campaign:
As a reminder, earlier in the afternoon, about fifty members of the "Azov" battalion and "Right Sector" blocked the entrance to the Consulate General of Russia in Odessa, disrupting the reception in honour of the Day of Russia. The Consulate was pelted with eggs and potatoes, and people who came to the reception were forced to kneel down and shout that they are Ukraine. According to the "ataman of the Gaydamak black sea group" Sergey Gusalyuk, the participants wanted "to at least identify supporters of the "aggressor country".
The Ukrainian Convicts in Russia Yuri Soloshenko and Gennady Afanasiev* signed an agreement to serve their sentence in the territory of Ukraine, said the latter's lawyer Alexander Popkov RIA Novosti.
"Now the negotiations on the transfer of Afanasiev and Soloshenko will go to the diplomatic level, everything is at the stage "just about". Movement is all that is needed - we signed. This is a different paper, including consent to serving the sentence on the territory of Ukraine - it is one of the transfer mechanisms," said Afanasiev's lawyer Alexander Popkov.
Also, according to the defence, Soloshenko and Afanasiev wrote a petition to the President of Russia for a pardon, and signed a number of other papers necessary for the transfer of prisoners.
(O.R: Both were involved in plotting acts of terrorism in Crimea as members of Right Sector)
Around May 20th, the so-called “Syrian Democratic Forces”, the main component of which are Kurdish militias, undertook a rather serious attempt to advance on the Syrian capital of ISIS, Raqqa. They undertook this action not by themselves but apparently on the initiative of the United States. Before the beginning of the offensive, the four-star general and head of the Central Command of the US Armed Forces (CENTCOM), Joseph Leonard Votel, visited Northern Syria.
Syria and Russia vs. the Kurds and the US
It is difficult to believe, and it indeed smacks of surrealism, that the Syrian Democratic Forces include Kurdish brigades, i.e., the natural enemies of the US’ NATO ally, Turkey, and the sworn allies of the US’ natural enemy, Assad. Nevertheless, they are supported by approximately 250 American “military advisors/marines” (apparently these are US special operation forces), around 20 American combat aircraft, and up to a thousand PMSC mercenaries from NATO countries.
According to Washington’s official position, badge-wearing Americans are not participating in combat operations. But according to media reports, they are in fact personally fighting in the most difficult zones and are directing the targeting of US aircraft. The Yankee’s activity is confirmed by the fact that they have successfully spread scandalous photo and video materials in which they can be seen wearing the stripes of the Kurdish People’s Self-Defense Forces who make up the backbone of the SDF.
Such open support on the part of the Americans for Syrian Kurds has caused a painful reaction on the part of Ankara, which considers the Kurdish People’s Self-Defense Forces to be a terrorist organization. The Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mevlut Cavusoglu, has accused the US of double standards and advised them to wear the badges of the Islamic State. He said:
“It is unacceptable that our allies have worn the chevrons of the Kurdish People’s Self-Defense Forces. We have responded to this by declaring that it is unacceptable. These are double standards and manifestations of duplicity. We advise them to wear the chevrons of the ‘Islamic State’, ‘Jebat al-Nusra’ and ‘Al-Qaeda’ when traveling to other regions of Syria. And when they go to Africa, let them wear the stripes of Boko Haram.”
US officials apologized without any special servility, but have promised to ban “fraternal badge-wearing” with Kurds.
However, the fact remains that the Americans are formally coordinating Kurdish operations against the Islamic State, which has received practically overt support from the US-allied Persian Gulf monarchies and allied Turkey, and which, according to number of analysts, itself emerged and expanded not without Washington's help.
In this situation, Syrian-Russian-Iranian forces are acting at the same time as allies and rivals of the Kurdish-American alliance, and began to advance towards Raqqa a few days after the SDF did.
Experts have begun to predict who will reach the ISIS capital first, who will hoist his flag of victory first, and whether or not there will be a direct confrontation between the American special forces accompanying the Kurds and the legal Syrian government aided by Russian troops. The Financial Times anxiously suggested that “the battle for Raqqa risks pitting Russian and US forces against each other” and pondered whether it would be possible to avoid such an undesirable collision. The hope is that American and Russian forces have already worked out cooperation.
It is by all means possible to understand the passions and attention of journalists. Capturing ISIS’ capital would be a grand media victory even more significant than the liberation of Palmyra. And Palmyra, in addition to its world fame for its cultural heritage, is extremely important infrastructurally as the “central intersection” of the Syrian desert.
In addition to its military value as the seizure of one of ISIS strongholds, the capture of is Raqqa is also ideologically important. A successful storm of the city would show that the “Caliphate” can’t even keep what it has proclaimed to be its own home.
If the Syrians, Russians, and Iranians achieve this, then they will show the whole world that they are the main fighters against terrorism and are fundamentally in control of the situation in the country. If the Americans and Kurds get ahead of them, then, firstly, the success at Palmyra will pale in comparison and, secondly, Raqqa, with its enormous slice of North-Eastern Syria, could be carved into a Kurdish national formation (whether federated or independent).
The US absolutely does not want to see Assad’s army in Raqqa. The State Department Spokesman, Mark Toner, directly stated:
“I do not have full information about the progress of the battle for Raqqa. If the city were to be liberated, then we would evaluate this like the liberation of Palmyra. It would be better than the presence of ISIS terrorists, but not much better.”
How much further to Raqqa? The positions of each side
For now, the possibility of clashes between Russian and US troops is unrealistic. The SDF have formally accumulated around 30 - 50,000 fighters for the offensiveaccording to different reports. In reality, however, only 4-5,000 of them have been deployed towards Raqqa and are mostly bogged down in positional battles for a few small villages. Although the Kurdish positions were originally 30-45 kilometers from Raqqa, they have essentially failed to advance. On the other hand, the SDF has built up a fairly successful offensive on the city of Manbij in the direction of Aleppo.
Syrian government forces are successfully advancing in the direction of the city of Tabqa located 40 kilometers from Raqqa. According to some reports, they were able to advance up to 30-35 kilometers in the first few days. According to the latest information, the frontline units of the Syrian Army are positioned 18 kilometers from Tabqa. On the map below, the deployment of the Syrian Army (the yellow at the bottom) and Kurdish brigades (yellow at the top) can be seen in reference to the city of Raqqa located on the Euphrates river midway between these forces.
Along the Homs-Raqqa highway are advancing Desert Falcon brigades, 18 tank divisions, 4 mechanized divisions, a regiment from Golan and the marine corps of Syria, with a total personnel of around 4,500 people. The road before them is being “cleared” by Russian attack helicopters. In addition to old Soviet tanks and conventional machine-gun-mounted trucks, a T-90 and the newest “Tiger” combat vehicle are taking part in the offensive. Media reports have said that Russian Spetsnaz are also operating on the ground with the Syrians.
Using long-range communications, ISIS has tried to strike their flanks and cut off the group from the main force, but this has failed. Despite the fact that the terrorists have reported their move to the highway, this in fact turned out to be a lie - in reality, they moved forward a little, but were soon defeated and retreated.
Why is their no advance on Tabqa? Besides the fact that this is the “gateway” to Raqqa, there is also a hydroelectric power station and airfield, the control of which would untie the hands of Russian air forces. At the present moment, the home base of our aircraft is a bit distant from Raqqa, which adversely affects the capabilities of our airmen.
Taking Tabqa would give the Syrians a significant advantage in the offensive on Raqqa.
But then again, why are the Americans and the Kurds not throwing all of their forces towards Raqqa? It’s possible that the reason behind this is that they have other goals, namely, the necessity of seizing the above-mentioned town of Manbij. This city is one of the key points on the road between Aleppo and Raqqa. In addition, it is simultaneously a bridge between Syrian Islamic terrorists operating in the area and Turkey, as well as the barrier separating Kurdish enclaves. The latter deserves a more detailed discussion in order to understand the new plan of the US.
Kurdistan as a tool for dividing Syria
In March 2016, Kurdish “cantons” announced the creation of a federal entity called Rojava in Northern Syria. The key role in this process was played by the “Democratic Union” which, according to statements by the Turks, is linked to the Kurdistan Workers Party professing a national-Marxist ideology. The Democratic Union is not so much striving for independence from Syria as it is demanding autonomy from Bashar al-Assad. Moreover, this union plays a key role in the operations of the Kurdish self-defense brigades. In addition to the DU, there also exists the anti-Assad, more right-wing Kurdish National Council which insists that the “Democratic Union” is incapable of defending Kurdish interests.
Kurdish autonomy already de-facto exists, but de jure it is not recognized by Syria or neighboring countries. Assad has reacted to any talks on the autonomy of this or that region quite painfully, which has added fuel to the fire and strengthened the hitherto not-too-powerful Kurdish National Council. This is forcing the Democratic Union to engage in operations in order to restore its credibility. The Americans are cleverly playing with these contradictions and have hinted that they will protect the Kurds while trying to bring the Democratic Union closer to them by using the fact that it is located between Damascus and Ankara, i.e., between the hammer and the anvil.
When they started the revolutionary adventure in Damascus, the US needed all of Syria as a key transport hub of the Middle East. Assad was a key obstacle preventing American allies in the Persian Gulf from laying down pipelines through Syria running to Europe. Following the intervention of the Russian airforce, they were no longer capable of taking the whole of Syria. After all, how can they gain access to the sea in Latakia now that there’s a Russian base there?
It is for this reason that the US has left its bet on Kurdistan, and moreover a Syrian-Iraqi-Turkish one, since access to the sea can now only be achieved via Turkey. The key to the process of this creation is Manbij, the capture of which would allow them to begin to physically unite the Kurdish “cantons” and access the “gate” to Turkey.
It’s clear that the Turks have figured some of this out and are not too happy about what’s happening, but who is asking them anyway? For the Persian Gulf Monarchies, it would of course be better to control this pipeline corridor directly through their spiritually dear and financed ISIS. But if the Caliphate in Syria fails, then in the worst case scenario there will still be the American-Kurdish variant.
Moscow and Damascus’ task is sufficiently difficult. First of all, they need to take Raqqa, which will be far from simple. Secondly, they have to stabilize the situation in the Aleppo area and thereby shuffle the Turks’ and Americans’ cards. Thirdly, and this depends 99% on Assad, they need to resume talks with the Kurds and persuade them to return to a normal existence in the framework of a unitary Syrian state, even a federal one. Completing this task would be an almost complete victory for Russia and Assad. The rest will just be matter of technique.
Seville 1936
Similarities between the aspirations of the “allies” for Raqqa and 1945 undoubtedly exist. In both cases, Moscow and Washington competed for influence on a territory liberated from an aggressor. In both cases, the position of Moscow was more altruistic and constructive, while Washington’s was cynical. Then, just as now, the US fought with one hand while supporting the aggressor with the other. Just as how US special services cooperated with the Nazis, so do they now have close contacts with the terrorists.
But the role of the battle for Raqqa in 2016 is inferior in importance to the role of the battle for Berlin in 1945. Rather, it is a prelude comparable in significance to the Spanish Civil War when each side tested its strength and tested new tactics and new kinds of weapons. The main battle will - God forbid that it comes to this - take place in the European and Far Eastern theaters - which is fine, if only it would be a political-economic and informational one.
The Eurasian Economic Union, although a fairly young integration association, is rapidly developing. In just the past year and a half of its existence, the project has literally transformed into a center of Eurasian gravity. On January 1st, 2015, the treaty on the established of the EAEU entered into force and on as soon as May 29th an agreement on establishing a free trade zone with Vietnam was signed. With each passing day, the number of countries announcing their desire to cooperate with the union is growing. Negotiations on establishing free trade zones are already underway with Egypt, Thailand, and Iran. Pakistan, India, China, and Singapore have also expressed their interest in the project. More and more countries are being added to this number.
Israel: rapprochement despite close ties with the US
Despite special relations with the United States and declarations that Russia will never replace such, relations between various countries and the EAEU are developing at an exponential rate.
A few days ago, negotiations on the establishment of a free trade zone between the EAEU and Israel were begun. It all started with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s routine visit to Moscow where he demonstrated his interest in the project. Last fall at a press conference, the ministry of immigrant absorption and strategic planning of Israel, Ze’ev Elkin, stated Israel's readiness to create a free trade zone with the EAEU. On this note, he stressed that such an agreement was planned to be concluded in the shorter possible time.
The frequent meetings of Netanyahu, the Israeli President Rivlin, and Putin are generally consistent with the statements of Israeli authorities. Abstract thoughts on the expansion of economic cooperation between the two countries have gradually moved into the sphere of concrete negotiations. And this is all thanks to the EAEU.
Following his meeting with his Israeli colleague Russian President Vladimir Putin remarked:
“I’m sure that the creation of a free trade zone between the EAEU and Israel would give impetus to the development of business relations. Recently, in Astana, I discussed this with colleagues of the EAEU and substantive negotiations on this matter are to be launched in this year.”
Putin also noted that Israeli agricultural producers will expand their share on the Russian market in the near future. Experts predict a possible rise in trade between Israel and the EAEU countries of 6-8%. Although these margins might not be so huge for Russia, the country nevertheless gains the opportunity to increase investments and improve the transfer of Israeli technology. First and foremost, we are dealing with agricultural technology, the pharmaceutical industry, and the aircraft industry.
Israel is where Palestine is
Following negotiations between Israel and Russia came the turn of Palestinian partners. On June 8th, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, Sergey Lavrov, stated following negotiations with his Palestinian colleague Riad al-Maliki that Palestine is also interested in the integration project. On this, Putin said:
“Among the promising spheres we discussed today was the possibility of establishing relations and cooperation between Palestine and the EAEU. Our Palestinian friends have expressed their interest and we will support them in this.”
One zone for two
Incentives for expanding the EAEU have arisen not only outside but also within the organization itself. At the meeting of the heads of the CIS states in Bishkek, Kyrgyz Prime Minister Sooronbay Jeenbekov proposed to consider the introduction of a full-scale free trade regime between the CIS and EAEU. In his words, this would help strengthen trade and economic relations between the CIS and EAEU countries.
Experts, however, are skeptical about such statements. As the first deputy director of the “Eurasians - New Wave” Foundation and expert on Kyrgyzstan, Denis Berdakov, has noted, this is most likely a populist statement since there will be no real results from such a merger.
The analyst emphasizes: “The CIS and EAEU are different-paced and different-oriented integrations. The CIS is more of a cultural-educational character and allows the post-Soviet space to be linked in one way or another. But the EAEU is to a larger extent an economic integration aimed at the creation of a customs space.”
In addition, it is difficult to explain Jeenbekov’s statement given that the CIS space already has a free trade zone.
Nevertheless, the unification of these projects could become an impulse for the expansion of ties in the EAEU as well as with countries outside of the organization which desire to improve the quality standards of their products. In addition, according to the expert, without an expansion of the union’s ties with countries outside of the CIS and Central Asia, the EAEU is doomed insofar as its market capacities' further development and technologization are already insufficient.
Across countries and continents
The CIS is not the first integration association which has striven to work closely with the EAEU. In May 2015, negotiations began between the leaders of Russia and China on the conjugation of the Eurasian Economic Union and the “Silk Road Economic Belt.”
According to Putin, the linking of the EAEU and “Silk Road” projects means reaching a new level of partnership and essentially implies a common economic space on the continent.
But more than that, the EAEU is not planning to limit itself to the continent. In October 2015, the union established ties with two Latin American partners and memorandums were signed with Chile and Peru. In December, it became known that there are plans for the signing of a similar agreement with Mexico.
The force of attraction of the EAEU
Of course, it is to early to talk about the distant future of the EAEU as it is has only recently come into existence. 1.5 years of integration is a kind of funny measurement. Nonetheless, the organization has already managed to display its strength.
Over the past year and a half, the EAEU has become one of the most successful integration projects in the post-Soviet space. In this time, the union has advanced a long way in the sphere of taxation. The main policy objective at the current stage is avoiding double taxation and preventing tax evasion on income and capital. Thanks to this policy goal, the participating countries have already introduced changes to the legislation on the income of entities. They have put forth equal taxation on income for work in any country of the EAEU.
Of course, experts have noted many problems on the path of integration. Among them are included the lack of enthusiasm of individual participants, an uncertainty of priorities, the choice between the EAEU and EU, the dominance of political interests in the framework of economic integration, and the underdeveloped demand for investment services. Nevertheless, these factors are not always critical.
This point of view has been supported by the Chairwoman of the Federation Council, Valentina Matvienko:
“The EAEU is a bit more than a year old. But in this short term, five states with different levels of economic development were able to effectively cooperate in one integration association without withdrawals. Time is needed.”
Indeed, time will tell. In an evaluation of the union, moreover, one has to take into account the crisis phenomena in the world economy which have also affected the integration of the EAEU. Nevertheless, the interest of new countries and other integration groups from the most distant continents clearly suggests that the union has good prospects.
