Tag: Ukraine

On September 17, the Russian Defense Ministry presented a new version of Boeing MH17 accident cause brought down by the pro-Russian fighters in the sky over Donbass in 2014. According to new information of the Russian Ministry of Defense, the Malaysian plane was shot down by the Ukrainian rocket.

Comments were prompt. Independent European and American experts flayed ill-starred reporters of the Russian Defense Ministry.

In addition, Eliot Higgins, the founder of Bellingcat, gave his comment on it, having called a new version of Russians “the act of despair”. He expressed opinion that “the new truth” of the Russian Ministry of Defense would hardly influence judges and once again confirmed indisputability of the Russian military involvement to the crash of MH17.

The statement of the Russian Defense Ministry appeared on the threshold of the UNGA meeting where results of Malaysian Boeing crash investigation had to become one of the main topics for discussion. Apparently, Kremlin falls into despair understanding inevitability of Hague Tribunal.

In fact, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation has nothing but to present new and new versions about the Ukrainian trace, allegedly forged photos of the Buk missile system, and contradictory origin of the missile launched from it.

Nevertheless, all efforts of the Russian military fantasts are vain. Results of Bellingcat investigations and the official joint investigation team (JIT) clearly indicate that both the Buk and the missile launched from it were of the Russian origin. Prosecutor’s offices of the Netherlands and Australia have prepared the evidentiary base confirming that the missiles elements which struck the Malaysian plane in accuracy coincide with elements of a military unit of the Russian antiaircraft missile 9M38M1 – the Buk-M1-2.

This time the Russian Defense Ministry based its version on “research” of the fragments of a missile found on the scene. At the same time and there was a question left without explanation, why in due time the Joint investigation team did not receive the similar answer on the request, addressed to Russia, for origin of a rocket.

According to Mr. Higgins, nobody perceives in seriousness the versions of Boeing MH17 crash periodically disseminated by Russia. All have already got used that it is impossible to trust any information distributed by the Russian Defense Ministry as in the past it was often caught on lies and providing fabricated “proofs”.

The British expert is categorical that the statements of the Russian Defense Ministry are not only mendacious, but also are not logical. It is obvious that the Russian Defense Ministry is not interested in establishment of the true causes of the accident.

During the briefing, the Russian side said that a missile, which did not leave the territory of Ukraine after 1986, had brought down MH-17. The investigation has incontestable facts confirming that the Buk, which launched a missile at the Boeing MH17, arrived from Russia. So where is logic?

A new lie from Shoygu’s department will cause no more than irritation. Those who seriously take statements of the Russian Ministry of Defense are people who just want to believe that Ukraine is responsible. But the investigation has incontestable proofs that Russia sent the Buk, from which the Boeing MH17 was shot down, to the territory of Ukraine. The lie of Russia that sounds for four years of the investigation will hardly make today desirable effect.

However, this is not the whole story. Trying to cheat all civilized world, the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation and its proteges has decided to implement one more adventure. After the press conference the duplicating information explosion was made: allegedly the missile launched from the Buk had been delivered by Ukraine to Georgia, and then during war of 2008, taken by Russia and transported to the Russian territory.

Psychological plan is simple. Russians expected that experts and journalists would grasp at this information and would call into question the fact established by the investigation that the Boeing MH17 was hit by the missile 9МЗ8 М1 launched from the Russian Buk, which arrived into the territory of Ukraine from the Russian Kursk.

It is clear to everyone that Russia is just trying to delay investigation. The minister of security and justice of the Netherlands Stef Blok has the same opinion. But in spite of the fact that the Netherlands investigators have already spent a lot of time to exclude any fake versions of Kremlin, the investigation team is ready to check all “proofs” provided by the Russian Defense Ministry just further to avoid charges of bias.

However, in connection with the “new evidence” provided by Russia about allegedly involvement of the Ukrainian side in air crash we may have more serious conclusion… Perhaps Russia really used the Ukrainian missile for the Buk, taken out from Georgia and consciously shot down the foreign plane to defame Ukraine. There is a hope that thanks to the modern technologies and numerous “traces” (photos and videos with geotags) posted in social networks the investigation will have opportunities to establish the truth and to make guilty responsible persons.

Read More

On September 17, the Russian Defense Ministry presented a new version of Boeing MH17 accident cause brought down by the pro-Russian fighters in the sky over Donbass in 2014. According to new information of the Russian Ministry of Defense, the Malaysian plane was shot down by the Ukrainian rocket.

Comments were prompt. Independent European and American experts flayed ill-starred reporters of the Russian Defense Ministry.

In addition, Eliot Higgins, the founder of Bellingcat, gave his comment on it, having called a new version of Russians “the act of despair”. He expressed opinion that “the new truth” of the Russian Ministry of Defense would hardly influence judges and once again confirmed indisputability of the Russian military involvement to the crash of MH17.

The statement of the Russian Defense Ministry appeared on the threshold of the UNGA meeting where results of Malaysian Boeing crash investigation had to become one of the main topics for discussion. Apparently, Kremlin falls into despair understanding inevitability of Hague Tribunal.

In fact, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation has nothing but to present new and new versions about the Ukrainian trace, allegedly forged photos of the Buk missile system, and contradictory origin of the missile launched from it.

Nevertheless, all efforts of the Russian military fantasts are vain. Results of Bellingcat investigations and the official joint investigation team (JIT) clearly indicate that both the Buk and the missile launched from it were of the Russian origin. Prosecutor’s offices of the Netherlands and Australia have prepared the evidentiary base confirming that the missiles elements which struck the Malaysian plane in accuracy coincide with elements of a military unit of the Russian antiaircraft missile 9M38M1 – the Buk-M1-2.

This time the Russian Defense Ministry based its version on “research” of the fragments of a missile found on the scene. At the same time and there was a question left without explanation, why in due time the Joint investigation team did not receive the similar answer on the request, addressed to Russia, for origin of a rocket.

According to Mr. Higgins, nobody perceives in seriousness the versions of Boeing MH17 crash periodically disseminated by Russia. All have already got used that it is impossible to trust any information distributed by the Russian Defense Ministry as in the past it was often caught on lies and providing fabricated “proofs”.

The British expert is categorical that the statements of the Russian Defense Ministry are not only mendacious, but also are not logical. It is obvious that the Russian Defense Ministry is not interested in establishment of the true causes of the accident.

During the briefing, the Russian side said that a missile, which did not leave the territory of Ukraine after 1986, had brought down MH-17. The investigation has incontestable facts confirming that the Buk, which launched a missile at the Boeing MH17, arrived from Russia. So where is logic?

A new lie from Shoygu’s department will cause no more than irritation. Those who seriously take statements of the Russian Ministry of Defense are people who just want to believe that Ukraine is responsible. But the investigation has incontestable proofs that Russia sent the Buk, from which the Boeing MH17 was shot down, to the territory of Ukraine. The lie of Russia that sounds for four years of the investigation will hardly make today desirable effect.

However, this is not the whole story. Trying to cheat all civilized world, the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation and its proteges has decided to implement one more adventure. After the press conference the duplicating information explosion was made: allegedly the missile launched from the Buk had been delivered by Ukraine to Georgia, and then during war of 2008, taken by Russia and transported to the Russian territory.

Psychological plan is simple. Russians expected that experts and journalists would grasp at this information and would call into question the fact established by the investigation that the Boeing MH17 was hit by the missile 9МЗ8 М1 launched from the Russian Buk, which arrived into the territory of Ukraine from the Russian Kursk.

It is clear to everyone that Russia is just trying to delay investigation. The minister of security and justice of the Netherlands Stef Blok has the same opinion. But in spite of the fact that the Netherlands investigators have already spent a lot of time to exclude any fake versions of Kremlin, the investigation team is ready to check all “proofs” provided by the Russian Defense Ministry just further to avoid charges of bias.

However, in connection with the “new evidence” provided by Russia about allegedly involvement of the Ukrainian side in air crash we may have more serious conclusion… Perhaps Russia really used the Ukrainian missile for the Buk, taken out from Georgia and consciously shot down the foreign plane to defame Ukraine. There is a hope that thanks to the modern technologies and numerous “traces” (photos and videos with geotags) posted in social networks the investigation will have opportunities to establish the truth and to make guilty responsible persons.

Read More

On September 17, the Russian Defense Ministry presented a new version of Boeing MH17 accident cause brought down by the pro-Russian fighters in the sky over Donbass in 2014. According to new information of the Russian Ministry of Defense, the Malaysian plane was shot down by the Ukrainian rocket.

Comments were prompt. Independent European and American experts flayed ill-starred reporters of the Russian Defense Ministry.

In addition, Eliot Higgins, the founder of Bellingcat, gave his comment on it, having called a new version of Russians “the act of despair”. He expressed opinion that “the new truth” of the Russian Ministry of Defense would hardly influence judges and once again confirmed indisputability of the Russian military involvement to the crash of MH17.

The statement of the Russian Defense Ministry appeared on the threshold of the UNGA meeting where results of Malaysian Boeing crash investigation had to become one of the main topics for discussion. Apparently, Kremlin falls into despair understanding inevitability of Hague Tribunal.

In fact, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation has nothing but to present new and new versions about the Ukrainian trace, allegedly forged photos of the Buk missile system, and contradictory origin of the missile launched from it.

Nevertheless, all efforts of the Russian military fantasts are vain. Results of Bellingcat investigations and the official joint investigation team (JIT) clearly indicate that both the Buk and the missile launched from it were of the Russian origin. Prosecutor’s offices of the Netherlands and Australia have prepared the evidentiary base confirming that the missiles elements which struck the Malaysian plane in accuracy coincide with elements of a military unit of the Russian antiaircraft missile 9M38M1 – the Buk-M1-2.

This time the Russian Defense Ministry based its version on “research” of the fragments of a missile found on the scene. At the same time and there was a question left without explanation, why in due time the Joint investigation team did not receive the similar answer on the request, addressed to Russia, for origin of a rocket.

According to Mr. Higgins, nobody perceives in seriousness the versions of Boeing MH17 crash periodically disseminated by Russia. All have already got used that it is impossible to trust any information distributed by the Russian Defense Ministry as in the past it was often caught on lies and providing fabricated “proofs”.

The British expert is categorical that the statements of the Russian Defense Ministry are not only mendacious, but also are not logical. It is obvious that the Russian Defense Ministry is not interested in establishment of the true causes of the accident.

During the briefing, the Russian side said that a missile, which did not leave the territory of Ukraine after 1986, had brought down MH-17. The investigation has incontestable facts confirming that the Buk, which launched a missile at the Boeing MH17, arrived from Russia. So where is logic?

A new lie from Shoygu’s department will cause no more than irritation. Those who seriously take statements of the Russian Ministry of Defense are people who just want to believe that Ukraine is responsible. But the investigation has incontestable proofs that Russia sent the Buk, from which the Boeing MH17 was shot down, to the territory of Ukraine. The lie of Russia that sounds for four years of the investigation will hardly make today desirable effect.

However, this is not the whole story. Trying to cheat all civilized world, the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation and its proteges has decided to implement one more adventure. After the press conference the duplicating information explosion was made: allegedly the missile launched from the Buk had been delivered by Ukraine to Georgia, and then during war of 2008, taken by Russia and transported to the Russian territory.

Psychological plan is simple. Russians expected that experts and journalists would grasp at this information and would call into question the fact established by the investigation that the Boeing MH17 was hit by the missile 9МЗ8 М1 launched from the Russian Buk, which arrived into the territory of Ukraine from the Russian Kursk.

It is clear to everyone that Russia is just trying to delay investigation. The minister of security and justice of the Netherlands Stef Blok has the same opinion. But in spite of the fact that the Netherlands investigators have already spent a lot of time to exclude any fake versions of Kremlin, the investigation team is ready to check all “proofs” provided by the Russian Defense Ministry just further to avoid charges of bias.

However, in connection with the “new evidence” provided by Russia about allegedly involvement of the Ukrainian side in air crash we may have more serious conclusion… Perhaps Russia really used the Ukrainian missile for the Buk, taken out from Georgia and consciously shot down the foreign plane to defame Ukraine. There is a hope that thanks to the modern technologies and numerous “traces” (photos and videos with geotags) posted in social networks the investigation will have opportunities to establish the truth and to make guilty responsible persons.

Read More

Approximately this time 79 years ago German dictator Adolf Hitler and his Soviet associate Joseph Stalin divided Poland. The “Axis” states at that time have already occupied Albania, Ethiopia, Czechoslovakia and Austria. A part of the European states, particularly Hungary, became the allies of Hitlerite expansion voluntarily. Those days’ Hungarian governor, admiral Miklós Horthy, as a token of gratitude to his German allies became one of the promoters of a large-scale slaughter on the European continent that resulted in joint invasion into Yugoslavia with Hitler in April 1941. Well, owing to Germany’s intervention and by force of the 1938 Vienna arbitration Hungary received a part of Slovakia and the Transcarpathian Ukraine – it is worth the gratitude.

One would ask, what is the purpose of this historical insight? The thing is today we may witness another revanchism ideas propagation in the Central Europe. One of its driving forces is Hungary led by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Skillful speculations in the ideas of an expansive imperialism enabled Mr. Orbán to hold the highest post in the state repeatedly after defeat in 2002 when he aspired to concentrate the main levers for controlling economy. In 2010 Fidezs party and their allies got majority in parliament and immediately proceeded to the constitutional reforms. They started clericalisation of the state, forbade abortions and same-sex marriages, adopted a number of laws which complicated life to Gipsies. In their actions the party in power could even surpass sometimes confirmed nationalists such as Jobbik party. On the back of such spirits a national holiday was declared on 4 June – “National Unity Day” commemorating the Treaty of Trianon of 1920. That time Hungary lost a considerable part of their lands, which passed to neighboring states. After Orbán’s come back to power, the state officially changed its name. Now it is called Hungary instead of “the Hungarian Republic” which means that the Hungarian community unites not only the Hungarians living within the territory of the state, but also those behind its borders.

Regardless of his pro-Hungarian nationalist spirit, Viktor Orbán is nevertheless an ordinary goopy politician and officer. Supported by his environment he speculates in revanchist anti-European ideas prevailing in the Hungarian society. When there is no bread, people should be given circuses. Hence, Mr. Orbán juggles with the ideas of “Great Hungary” and reunion of split nation. In 2009, addressing ethnic Hungarians in Slovakia, he called them state-building community, humiliating thereby Slovaks. As a matter of a fact, you should not expect crossing the border of some of the adjacent states and proceeding to its conquest by Hungarian troops tomorrow or in a week. Currently the confrontation is taking place on the diplomatic level.

Today the Hungarian government chose the weakest neighbor as the victim of “expansion” – Ukraine that has been resisting to Russia’s invasion in their eastern regions for nearly five years. Meanwhile the Hungarian government issues the passports to residents of Transcarpathian (Zakarpattya) region of Ukraine under the seal of secrecy that is quite indicative fact. The recent one is the case of Beregovo city, which even compelled the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to expel the Hungarian consul from there. However, the territory is a little interesting to Hungarians, who are interested in people. The economic situation in Hungary is far from being perfect. High prices and low wages force Hungarians to look for the employment in neighboring states or to migrate further westwards. Issuing passports to Ukrainians allows at least partially compensate deficiency of manpower. Well, what is wrong about it? Involvement of manpower from neighboring states is not a know-how.

Yet such a policy of “turning a blind eyes” or “appeasement of an aggressor” has already led to a new redraw of the European borders initiated by modern Russian dictator Vladimir Putin in 2014. His messages were quite identical: Crimea annexation – as far as many people have Russian passports there, war in the east of Ukraine – as far as ethnic Russians live there. By the way, Viktor Orbán supports lifting sanctions from Russia imposed in response to their aggressive foreign policy. On the other side, he demands from Ukraine granting more autonomy and rights to the Transcarpathian Hungarians. At the same time, Hungary actively opposes Ukrainian efforts of EU and NATO integration.

We should also point out that Hungary is not the only state with strong anti-European spirits. Having such an example, other states are also highly probable to follow the same way. Thus the whole Europe may fall into mutual recriminations and appeals to revision of frontiers. Do not console yourself with illusory hopes that membership in international organizations such as NATO and EU may somehow interfere with such processes in the majority of the European states. At Horthy times, Hungary was a member of League of Nations, though it did not stop them from the expansion against their neighbors. However, yet in 1942 Horthy realised hopelessness of war and entered into secret negotiations with Allies. Therefore, we may only rely on rational mind of present Hungarian governor and his ability to diminish imperial ambitions under pressure of the European community.

Read More

According to art. 55, 56, 59, 60 of the Convention relative to the protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of August 12, 1949, maintenance of occupied territories is an obligation of the occupying party. As the Crimea was illegally annexed by Russia in spring 2014, responsibility for an ecological situation is the Russian obligation.

Let’s briefly run back over chronology of events. In the north of the Crimea, in the city of Armyansk there is the biggest plant in Eastern Europe on production of titanic products – Ukrainian Chemical Products better known as “Crimean Titan” owned by the Ukrainian oligarch Dmitry Firtash who is currently taking shelter in Austria from extradition to the USA. Notwithstanding occupation and sanctions, the plant continues its work, receiving raw materials through shell companies and carriers. A process of titan production is followed with a large number of dangerous chemical wastes used to be unloaded in special precipitation tanks nearby the plant. For neutralization of their negative impact on environment, they were filled in with a large amount of fresh water received from the North Crimean channel. After occupation in 2014, the Ukrainian authorities used their legitimate right, blocked the channel, thus depriving the Crimea of water from Dnieper. In consequence the management of the enterprise and officials had to cover requirements of water, using local resources: small reservoirs of rain water and artesian wells. But they were quickly exhausted, and the summer of 2018 was hot, that caused accident.

On the night of August 24 there was an emission of harmful substances about what locals reported. Metal subjects were covered with unclear oxidation, trees started perishing, in air there was an unpleasant chemical smell. The local occupational administration tried to hide this event, having neutralized emission consequences by filling up of settling tank with soda. But the factor of high temperature of air was not considered, and as a result the situation was aggravated. In vicinities of the plant and in the city death cases from suffocation of birds and small animals (rodents, domestic cats) were reported. It was also reported about death of people, but there is no reliable information on it. Nearly two weeks later (on September 4), the Russian officials declared the beginning of partial evacuation of the population, so far only children, from Armyansk and neighboring villages. But the central Russian TV channels keep silence over technogeneous accident. Though the Russian authorities got used to hide such information as it was with emission of a radioactive element ruthenium-106 at the end of 2017 in Chelyabinsk, in the south of the Urals. The fact of the emission is confirmed by measurements carried out in Germany and France.

However, let’s talk about the Crimean case. There is an opinion that accident was deliberately provoked to force Ukraine to resume supply of water to the peninsula. Even the Ukrainian border service stated poisoning of its several employees who are on duty on border with occupied territories. However, the similar version looks very far-fetched. It is much more probable that the human factor is the main cause of the accident: habitual for Russians ” trusting to luck ” and postponement of the solution of small problems as a result lead to such deplorable consequences. And after all this situation is not simply environmental disaster for Ukraine and Russia, but for the whole Black Sea region, even for Eastern Europe and Asia Minor. The cloud of chemicals does not care of geopolitics and nationalities, and the poisoned rainfall depends on the wind. It is worth remembering the tragedy in Chernobyl – accident happened in the USSR, but all Europe suffered. Here the situation is very similar.

Russia once again confirmed its inability to maintain the occupied territories. After all the plant where this tragedy happened is not the only potentially dangerous undertaking in the Crimea. Also it should be taken into account that for the last 4 years Russia has provided the peninsula with the weapon, including nuclear. And the only exit from the current situation – a full and unconditional deoccupation of the Crimea. Only this way is a possible resolution of all those problems.

Read More

The conference “disputed territory on the border of Europe” is going to be held in Bucharest on September 7, 2018. The organizer of this event is the Institute for Connecting Science and Society (ICSS), Geneva, Switzerland. The most interesting thing is that the participants of this event will not discuss those lands that are already hybrid annexed or occupied, for example, Crimea, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Transdniestria or LDPR, but are going to determine whether it is expedient to consider Transcarpathia, Bukovina and Bessarabia as Ukrainian territories. In other words, it is an attempt to undermine the territorial integrity of Ukraine. And all this goes under the patronage of the “Swiss” institute and in the context of the Kremlin’s strategic concept for the near future.

“It is proposed to examine three main cases – three cross-border territories that are disputed “in both international and anthropological aspects: Transcarpathia, Bukovina and Bessarabia”, – the announcement of event said.

In general, at first glance, it may appear that this is about another betrayal from Europe. However, every time something like this happens, it comes to mind the letter of the State Duma of Russia of March 24, 2014, sent to the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of Hungary, Poland and Romania, with a proposal to split Ukraine into four parts. This conference is definitely something similar to this provocation.

That is why we’ve decided to consider and analyze, under whose “flag” the conference actually will be held. And do not be surprised, it will take place under the flag of the Kremlin, despite the Swiss organizer.

Fictitious institution

According to the data of the commercial register and economic information “Moneyhouse”, ICSS was established in Swiss Geneva, just over a year ago. Its registered office is ch. de l’Ancien-Puits 11, 1213 Petit-Lancy. Its legal form of ownership is an association. Its aim is to bridge the gap between the production of scientific knowledge and its accessibility, and to strengthen the relationship between science and society.

The question immediately arises: where are the issues related to politics, security, and the belonging of particular territories? This means that the Institute goes beyond its statutory activities. And the form of property unlikely allows it to interfere with the affairs of foreign states.

Further, we learn that the structure itself functions at the expense of projects, donations, subsidies, contributions, as well as any other sources, not prohibited by the law of the Swiss Confederation. Curiously, but the founders of ICSS are two persons: the president, Mercier-Peschoux Chantal, a citizen of France, the city and municipality of Lance, the Ile-de-France region; the vice-president of the Institute – Irina Koval-Leskova, a Ukrainian citizen, a resident of Odessa.

Therefore, be patient, and you’ll see the same hybrid Russian trace after story about each of them.

From Paris with Love … to Putin

We, perhaps, will not go by chronology, in order to make history more interesting. So, on March 21, 2016, under the patronage of Mercier-Peschoux Chantal (he did not participate himself), the conference with a rather catchy title “Ukraine: Maidan – Odessa, two years later” was held in Geneva. As you already understood, the subject of this arrangement is the events of May 2, 2014, occurred in the Ukrainian seaside city, when 46 people were killed. At this conference, the participants blamed and blackened the Ukrainian authorities and shielded the Kremlin and urged international partners to put pressure over the official Kiev.

The conference itself was held at the Palais des Nations (UN building, Geneva). It is significant that the announcement of the event was posted on March 13 on one of the French sites (gray segment of the Internet) – “Arrêt sur info”. This site, created by a Frenchwoman with Italian roots, Silvia Cattori, is engaged in covering wars and various conflicts that the world media “do not talk” about. We suppose that we are talking about giving false and biased information.

The moderator of this event was the representative of the Agency for Human Rights (ADH) – Amir Forotan, and here it is necessary to explain: this agency is one of thousands of non-governmental organizations with which one of the six main organs of the UN, the Economic and Social Council, cooperates.

In 2015, the Agency for Human Rights received a special consultative status, that formally gives an opportunity to hold events in the premises belonging to the UN. Therefore, the conference was held at the Palais des Nations. Such NGOs should annually publish a report on the work done, but for some reason this one does not do this. You also will not find information about the founders of this structure on the site, but on the official website of the Trade of Switzerland. It turns out that the only one founder, participant and head of this organization is the same Amir Forotan. Once he was known as a member of another organization also “defending human rights” – Global Network for Rights and Development (GNDR).

It was registered in Stavanger (Norway), and had units in Jordan, Spain, Belgium, the United Arab Emirates and Switzerland (Geneva). The activities of this structure were accompanied with accusations of grave criminal offenses. In 2015, the Norwegian police detained its head, a Norwegian of Palestinian origin Loai Deeb on charges of money laundering and misappropriation of property. The Israeli media suspected GNDR members in illegal intelligence activity under the cover of human rights work. This structure went bankrupt in 2016.

In addition, Forotan is close to the French political association “Egalite et Reconsilliation” (“Equality and Reconciliation”), supporting the policies of Russia and other rogue states. For example, in 2009, during the arrival of Putin in France, it organized a “welcome committee” to Putin together with the Russian embassy and the French Russian community.

Its current leader, Alain Soral, was a member of the central committee of the party “National Front” (Marin Le Pen) until 2009. He is a supporter of anti-Semitism, against the US, for cooperation with Russia and for the territorial division of France.

But let’s go back to the conference and find out who was involved in this action?

The main speaker was Xavier Moreau, a French entrepreneur, who has been living in Russia for 15 years. He is the author of the book “The New Great Russia and Ukraine. Why did France make a mistake”. It is about Paris’s wrong policy with regard to Putin’s Russia, and that aggression and occupation should be understood and forgiven.

What was Mr.Moreau’s task at the conference? Everything is very simple: he had to tell about the reasons for the “political evolution of Ukraine after the revolution, regime change, murder in Odessa; describe the root causes – international and national, that plunged the country into a fratricidal civil war”.

Certainly, there are immediately discernible stamps used daily by Russian propaganda against Ukraine – both in the Russian information space and in the media of Western countries.

Speakers at this event were two Ukrainians, residents of Odessa: Elena Radzikhovskaya and Victoria Machulko, who created the public organization – “Mothers’ Council of 2nd May”. At the same time, the organization does not indicate that the tragedy occurred because of provocations by Russian special services, because of their incitement to the mass separatist movement in this region.

However, not only Victoria is interesting in this context, but also one of her two sons – Eugene Machulko (born on December 25, 1975), a representative of the pro-Russian illegal armed formation “Orthodox Cossacks”, unit of Special Forces “Cossack”. On May 2, 2014, he participated in the attack on the pro-Ukrainian demonstration and in the subsequent armed confrontation with human toll. He was arrested and taken into custody. However, the court ruled him to house arrest with a ban to leave the apartment during a certain period of the day – from 9.00 to 13.00 and the electronic control was not applied as a preliminary measure of restraint. However, then due to the expiry of the judicial decision (August 31, 2014), all the measures of restraint were lifted. And now we do not know his location.

The second participant of the conference is a resident of Odessa Elena Radzikhovskaya, a mother of Andrei Brazhevsky, deceased in the House of Trade Unions of Odessa, and who supported the Russian aggression. She also appeared in the European Parliament talking about “Odessa Nazis and Fascists”. Now she is considered to be involved in organization of a terrorist group in 2001-2002, appeared in the so-called case of the Odessa Komsomol members.

At that time a gang led by the first secretary of the city committee of Komsomol of Odessa, Andrei Yakovenko, committed a series of terrorist acts in Ukraine, led anti-Ukrainian propaganda in military units, calling for liquidation of Ukraine, the “revival” of Tavria and the “Black Sea SSR” on the lands of Ukraine, inclusion it in the revived USSR, that is into Russia.

Here’s initial project “Novorossia”. It was the first year of Putin’s rule as president, and means that the plans to seize some lands began to be realized even then. And such conference with such participants was organized by Mr. Mercier-Peschoux Chantal. So, who is Mr. Mercier-Peschoux Chantal?

Who are you, Mercier-Peschoux Chantal?

Mercier-Peschoux Chantal is one who wrote a petition addressed to the former French President Francois Hollande in 2013, calling to stop the participation of the French forces in Syria, as it was contrary to the national interests of France.

It is noteworthy that Mercier-Peschoux Chantal pointed out in this petition that the evidence regarding the chemical attacks of Assad submitted for international consideration is unreliable. Meanwhile, there was another petition, though collective, sent in 2012 to the presidential administration of Hollande. There, the signatories also called on the former president of France to stop participation of the French forces in the Syrian campaign. It is clear that one of those who signed the document was Mercier-Peschoux Chantal.

In the last paragraph he wrote: “I am a member of the party “Republican and Civil Movement” from 1993 to 2006; close to the position of Nicolas Dupont-Enjan (without membership); I’m not deaf to the position of Marin Le Pen (yes, I know that this is not good)”, and my ballot remains available, in some cases. I resolutely oppose the diarchy of the Union for the People’s Movement (leader – Nicolas Sarkozy), but still the atlanticist to the bones”.

We do not know how Mr. Mercier-Peschoux Chantal as an atlanticist, but those people, whom he supports, profess the right, often radical ideas.

Let’s start by order. The party “Republican and Civil Movement” adheres to vague left-wing views based on the ideology of social democracy, populism, euroskepticism, patriotism and anti-Americanism, and requires a full-scale re-industrialization of France. Its former leader is Jean-Pierre Schevenman (now he has the status of honorary chairman). Shevenman is a fairly influential and well-known politician.

According to information for 2017, Shevenman is a special representative of the French government on issues of relations with Russia. On November 4 of the last year, he was awarded the “Order of Friendship” personally from the hands of V.Putin. Then, in November 2017, he visited Moscow and conveyed to the Russian president the message of the leader of France – Emmanuel Macron. This message spoke about cooperation in resolution of the Syrian conflict.

In an interview with Interfax (Russia) he indicated: “US sanctions imposed against the energy and military-industrial sector of the Russian Federation harm international relations”.

It should be noted that he also said that it was necessary to implement the Minsk Agreements (by two sides) and about the inadmissibility of creating conditions for “freezing” of the conflict.

He also drew attention to the fact that Minsk-2 should ultimately lead to the definition of election parameters in the occupied territories of Donbass, the definition of the special status of these lands and the expansion of decentralization. However, it should be clarified that in the first place the politician has put the component related to security.

Among other things, Shevman’s thoughts on the status of extended autonomy in Ukraine are interesting in this interview. He says: “As for the status of extended autonomy in Ukraine, it should include the right of citizens of that country to choose the language of education for their children”. Shevenman’s words told at the meeting with the Speaker of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, Vyacheslav Volodin, also attract interest.

We will provide a holistic statement: “I think that now it is necessary to focus on the problem of Ukraine. It is necessary that Ukraine becomes a bridge between Europe and Russia. I think that it is not a need to continue this stupid conflict. In Europe, however, most smart people do not want a return to the Cold War. So it seems to me that the problem today is from the Americans”.

We don’t know if Mercier-Peschoux Chantal and Shevenman are familiar each other, but it is obvious that the first one especially mentioned the French special representative in Russia in the text of the petition – to focus attention on the fact that he adheres to identical views, when the main thing is the resumption of relations with Russia and the gradual surrender of Ukrainian positions.

But let’s return once again to this petition. Mercier-Peschoux Chantal says: “I’m not deaf to the position of Marin Le Pen (yes, I know that this is not good), and my ballot remains available, in some cases”. We have to recall that Marin Le Pen – a former candidate for the presidency of France. She personally supported the so-called referendum in the Crimea, came to a personal audience with Putin before the elections. And now she is going to make a united front with other radical politicians and undermine the general European political institutions.

At once the question has appeared: whether it is possible to prove connection of Mercier-Peschoux Chantal to Le Pen? The adherence to these or other, even selective, positions is not a proof that these political figures cooperate. This does not mean that Mercier-Peschoux Chantal works for the Russians, even if we take into account his connection along the line: Forotan – Soral – Le Pen. But in his note to the notorious petition for Hollande, Mercier-Peschoux Chantal points out that he “is close to the position of Nicolas Dupont-Enjan”.

On March 15, 2016, Dupont-Enjan announced his candidacy for the presidency in elections 2017. In foreign policy, he proposed to withdraw unilaterally from the process of sanctions against Russia, to settle the situation in Donbass by giving Ukraine the status of a neutral state and turning it into a region of Russian-European cooperation. He also called for the security of Eastern Europe through the conclusion of a comprehensive treaty between Europe and Russia on peace and cooperation, thus reaching agreements on resolving frozen conflicts in Cyprus, Kosovo, Transdniestria and the Crimea. How do you like this idea?

And now let’s imagine the most interesting episode in this whole story. On April 28, 2017, Nicolas Dupont-Enjan announced the conclusion of a political agreement with Marin Le Pen, urging his supporters to vote for her in the second round of the elections. According to the reached agreements, in case of victory in the second round of the presidential elections, Le Pen would appoint Dupont-Enjan as the new Prime Minister of France. On October 25, 2017, he and the leader of the Christian Democratic Party, Jean-Frédéric Poisson, initiated a new political project – “Fans of France, a country is more important than parties” – which goal is to form a right alternative to the policy of Macron.

It seems to us that the puzzle has completed. Mercier-Peschoux Chantal, who clearly works against Ukraine, is trying to carry out another provocation in Bucharest, and he is connected in one or another way with right-wing radical forces from France, supporting the Kremlin.

There is a clear question: so under whose flag will the event take place in Romania – under the Swiss, under the French or under the Russian? But, before you answer it, let’s learn about the vice-president of the ICSS, organizing this event, Ukrainian citizen Irina Koval-Leskova.

Activist with “Russian smell”

Irina Koval-Leskova is a resident of Odessa, a founder of the “Formula of Success” agency, producing advertising, printed products and organizing various congresses and trade shows.

On May 27, 2014, immediately after the events of May 2, she organized a conference with the loud title “Democracy and Violence: Ukraine” in Paris where she criticized the Ukrainian authorities, spoke about the persecution, the illegality of the so-called Kiev regime and called on the international community to intervene in the investigation of events of May 2, 2014. She was supported by the socio-political association in support of the “Organization of European Unity” (ROUE).

This organization is also trying to find some common points with Russia, including historical ones. It is even interested in de Gaulle’s relationship with the Soviet leadership and other interesting topics and it’s supported in this by the Russian Center for Science and Culture in Paris.

Such centers are the structures of “Rossotrudnichestvo” – in fact, the structures of cover for Russian special services. They are engaged in attracting foreigners to their activities and with their help try to influence political life in a particular country.

And now, Irina Koval-Leskova, who has rather strange contacts, organizes an openly provocative, threatening Ukrainian territorial integrity event in Bucharest. She organizes it on behalf of the Swiss-registered structure, together with a French citizen, apparently connected with right-wing radical organizations, which have strong connections with Russia.

Read More

We all live in corporate world, this fact is beyond any doubts. It has some specific rules – the success is not just money, but money plus the influence on the people, which bring you some ability to enlarge your profit.

There are different types of corporations. Some of them produce cellphones, some of them produce food, some of them are prominent players in the fashion industry, and some of them produce believe in God. Yes, the religion is just the same commodity as food, electronic devices and the competition here is much harder than any other business faces with.

If we take a look on any religion, it is worth to admit that any religion has its dark sides, especially when we talk about the financial sources. Still the world has been changing and minimalism style has been the new trend. The Pope of Rome chooses bijouterie instead of jewelries, and uses budget sedan instead of special vehicle. His colleague from the Russian Orthodox church, patriarch Kirill, lives just the opposite life. The great number of golden church plates, golden headdresses could be explained by the traditions of Orthodox Church. Nevertheless, there is no explanation for expensive watches, premium-class cars, personal yacht and private jet, it looks like vanity and mercantilism. At the same time, Russian Patriarch never spent money on charity nevertheless his estate is more than 3 billion dollars.

It is his own decision how to spend his money. However, that financial issues insult the Patriarchy and reach international level. We mentioned the term “corporation” for a reason, as it is just what Russian Orthodox Church is now. What is the biggest threat to the business? Right – it is loosing of its assets’ cost and profit of it. The biggest asset of Moscow patriarchy is Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Moscow patriarchy, the branch which is totally controlled by Moscow in Ukrainian territory.

In short, Orthodox Church in Ukraine is divided into two main branches, and the difference between them is just the jurisdiction – the Moscow patriarchy is under direct control of Moscow while Kyiv patriarchy insists on its independence for the last 20 years. Recently, Kyiv patriarchy has got the real chance to become independent, to receive the Thomos (the act of recognition, granted by World patriarch). To tell that Russian reaction was extremely negative means to tell nothing. Their opponents faced with information attacks, threats of religious war coming soon, threats of separation of Orthodox world and other apocalyptic scenarios.

The issue of belief is secondary for Russian Orthodox Church, the main issue is the fear to lose its estates in Ukraine, and therefore to lose the profits. It is quite real. Ukrainian Orthodox church of Moscow patriarchy has got solid losses (the annexation of Crimea, war in Donbas and “green people” did their job well). The number of Ukrainians who want to stay in Russian church decreased. There were lots of facts when people demanded their congregations to be incorporated into Kyiv patriarchy, not in Moscow one. It looks like the returning of Kyiv Pechersk Lavra to Kyiv patriarchy will occur in the near future. That is completely unacceptable for Russian patriarch.

Instead of defending its position in the spheres of theology Russian church started out with threats and blackmailing. We have just mentioned the main theses of Moscow patriarchy, which were formulated in quite brutal manner and were sent to World patriarch Bartolomeus. Those who know Russian patriarch cannot be surprised by that fact. He is used to such methods. Since his teen age, he actively cooperated with KGB, he denounced his classmates and professors to security services. Such activity is the reason for rocketed career of today’s patriarch.

After the breakup of the USSR current patriarch started the schemes of cigarettes import with no customs fees, which gave him opportunity to become monopolist in this business activity. That is why current Moscow patriarch obtained the nickname “tobacco bishop” (his church rank at that time) and got the first capital, which was based on smuggling and illicit activity. Patriarch definitely uses the mask of decency and piety, but he is greedy person who is doing whatever it takes to save and to multiply his money.

That is why we do not need to be astonished with the methods of Russian church, methods of gang members who are trying to monopolize the whole Orthodox Church in the world. If the threats and blackmailing do not work, bribery will be used – you need something more, you have to pay.

Read More

In the context of continuing Russia aggression in the east of Ukraine, which proceeds to a chronic stage, events on its western borders remain in a relative shadow. Unfortunately, they are far from being conflict-free! While the eastern neighbor has visited Ukrainian territory on tanks, the Western prefer the soft force, money and manipulating sentiments. Though Hungary’s actions can be hardly referred to as impetuous, declarations and behavior of its officials give no grounds to doubt that western neighbors of Ukraine are always ready to use its internal and external problems.

The latest reason for concern was an appointment of the authorized Hungarian representative in Transcarpathia – the government’s representative who is responsible for development of the Ukrainian territory. The mere title of the position leads to a question whether that is an intervention in internal affairs of the sovereign state and in literal sense a step over the boundaries of peace neighborliness?

Whatever representations Hungarians have made with regard to sincerity of their intentions to develop Transcarpathia region and to support the ethnic Hungarians residing there, little by little Hungary interferes in affairs which by default fall under the scope of the sovereign state’s competence. Thus, the Hungarian parliament made an express stand against education act adopted by Ukraine in support of their language. The document provides for the protection mechanisms of Ukrainian by using it as basic language during school educational process without limitation to ethnic minorities. According to this law, beginning from the 5th form children of ethnic minorities shall study in Ukrainian, and learn their native language as a separate discipline. However, studying some disciplines in languages of EU states is not excluded.

Budapest has not only distorted the very meaning of the Ukrainian Act, having accused Ukraine, but even issued a resolution on this matter. The Hungarian parliament in its decision claimed that the Education Act outlaws all schools, higher education institutions and professional technical institutions which provide education in Hungarian. That is obvious and deliberate distortion of the Act. Also, deputies of the National Assembly of Hungary declare that educational process in languages of minorities becomes impossible though the Education Act provides for teaching several subjects in foreign languages, including Hungarian and Romanian.

The first meeting of Prime Minister Orban’s Government following the elections was marked by the adoption of the Memorandum on the Protection of the Transcarpathian Hungarians. The document was sent to the leaders of all NATO member states and the Secretary General of Alliance. In the memorandum the Hungarian government suggests NATO member states to consider “the problems of ethnic minorities in Ukraine related to the Ukrainian laws”.

To this end, manipulations by Euro-Atlantic aspirations of Ukraine are used as well. For instance, Foreign Minister of Hungary Peter Szijjártó emphasized that Hungary will not support rapprochement of Ukraine with NATO unless Kiev “stops encroachments upon the Hungarian minority”. In support of this statement Budapest proceeded to blocking up organisation of the Ukraine-NATO Commission’s meeting.

What are then the reasons for so strong counteraction of Hungarians to the implementation of such basic right as using of a state language in education by Ukraine?

Primarily, all this actions creates prerequisites for the probable scenario of stirring autonomist intentions in Transcarpathia region. Hungarian officials deny such charges in every possible way, though contribution of the Hungarian nationalists can be traced at the informal level, as long as they call certain regions of Ukraine their territory.

Secondly, at the latest parliamentary elections Hungary’s ‘passport policy’ in Ukraine provided support of ethnic Hungarians to Fidesz party, which expresses more and more Euroskeptical spirits. Modern Hungarian elites, similarly to those in Russia with their “Russian World” project, try to revive previous regional influence of the Austro-Hungarian Empire by means of ethnic Hungarians and pro-Hungarian public organizations, advancing the ideas of Hungarian autonomies within the territory of other states.

Perhaps such similarity of imperial aspirations and purposes allows Hungarians to perceive Russia as such “strategic partner” which can facilitate “restoration of historical justice” for quite insignificant concessions from the Hungarian side, and help Hungarians to reunite or even to return some lands.

If Budapest achieves their purposes and the Ukrainian Education Act will get amendments for their benefit, Transcarpathia in the nearest future will be completely madiarised and will lose language and cultural ties with a maternal part of Ukraine. Such approach perfectly meets the Russian plans for the partition of the Ukrainian lands.

By all means, Moscow encourages the Hungarian expansion to Transcarpathia not for nothing. They have repeatedly used Budapest for pressure upon Kiev. In 2015 after Mr. Orban’s visit to Moscow official Budapest refused to resell the Russian gas to Ukraine. At the same time Mr. Orban makes conciliatory declarations about the conflict in Donbas, levelling Russia’s participation in the armed conflict. Avoiding mentioning sanctions, he on the contrary calls to conciliation with an aggressor in exchange for economic sops, causing disruption of international law and order.

As a result, Ukraine appears between two states which prepare a ground for reconstruction of their ‘great empires’ of previous centuries upon the unspoken consent of the EU leaders. And if one of them makes it in the way of uncovered aggression, then another uses to this end covert and short, though not less decisive steps.

Read More

Strange though it may seem, Russia, which quite recently has attempted to present itself as civilized state and furthermore pretends to be one of the international leaders, may be capable of blatant violations of international arrangements and provisions of international law (unlawful Crimea annexation), and may even neglect inconditional human right for freedom of speech and belief both on their territory and within grabbed Ukrainian Crimea. Though last century Russia abode horror of Stalin’s purges, it comes back to totalitarian regime today which persecutes people for political beliefs.

The brightest example is the fate of Crimean resident Vladimir Balukh. In 2014, after Crimea occupation, the life of an ordinary farmer has drastically changed. Overt condemnation of aggression by him and support of Ukraine got on nervous of the new authorities. Initially Vladimir Balukh refused flatly from changing the Ukrainian ID for the Russian one. Though Russia enshrined the criminal responsibility for declarations of Crimea as non-Russian territory at legislative level, Balukh claimed he disregarded present authorities and still considered Crimean peninsula Ukrainian. In support of his citizenship he hoisted the Ukrainian flag in front of his house and denied any request of the local authorities to remove it. Policemen repeatedly interviewed him and strongly encouraged the neighbours to suspend their relations with Balukh, in the face of becoming ‘politically unreliable’. Agents of the security services threatened Balukh with reprisals to force him to change his position or leave Crimea. He received a clear message that he would face a prison sentence in Crimea for his pro-Ukrainian position.

However, the Crimean was not broken down neither by convictions, nor by threats, therefore, the authorities have been seeking more and more causes for his arrest and accusation in nonexistent crimes. After the meeting of the speaker of the Crimean parliament with public where Vladimir Balukh attempted to put some questions to the official, the Ukrainian was arrested and a criminal case was initiated against him under Art. 19.3 of the Code of Administrative Violations of the Russian Federation for ‘disobedience to the legitimate order of the police officer’, followed by the 3-days arrest and a fine.

Since this measure produced no proper effect on Balukh, another, more serious accusation, was not long in coming: in theft (…of tractor repair parts) (Art. 157 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Balukh’s home was searched and policemen managed to remove the Ukrainian flag. However, his involvement into the theft of tractor repair parts was not proved. To this end, police intentionally paid a night visit. As Balukh expressed the investigator his resentment, the new proceeding under Art. 319 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation was initiated for the ‘offence against the public authority’, followed by the arrest for 40 days.

After a while, in December 2016, Balukh hanged on Ukrainian flag on his house over again and attached a sign with an inscription “Heroes of Divine Sotnia Street” (in commemoration of the heroes fell during the Dignity Revolution in 2014 in Kiev). Requirements of the authorities to remove the sign and the flag were met by a peremptory refusal. Therefore, on December 8, 2016 Vladimir Balukh was newly arrested on a contrived accusation in illegal keeping of weapon (Arts. 222-222.1 of the CC RF) and placed in Razdolnenskyi detention facility. Officers of the FSS (FSB) reported 90 cartridges and several trotyl block found in his house.

Balukh’s neighbours also share the opinion about contrivedness of the accusations and explosive planted in the Ukrainian’s house, as they have seen unknowns who entered it few hours prior to search. Actually, no fingerprints of the accused were detected on the cartridges and explosive.

In August, 2017 the court passed a sentence upon the Ukrainian activist – 3 years 7 months in standard regime penal colony and a fine amounting to RUB 10 thousand. After Balukh filed an appeal, the case was submitted to the new trial.

The guilt of Vladimir Balukh was not proved, however, he has spent a year in detention centre (SIZO), though attorneys insisted on arrest in quarters due to severe health deterioration of their client. Nevertheless the court refused in changing the measure of restraint even after Balukh was taken from the court room by the ambulance. Only on December 1, 2017 Razdolnenskiy district court changed the measure of restraint to arrest in quarters for 2 months.

However, on December 6, 2017 Ukrainian activist was brought a new charge. This time Russian security officials incriminated him ‘disorganization of operation of detention centres’ for asserted blow of the SIZO official in the cell during Balukh’s examination. Balukh’s case was submitted for the new trial. Prosecution claimed 5 years and 1 month of penal colony settlement for him with a money penalty amounting to RUB 20 thousand. The court satisfied it in part: on January 16, 2018 Razdolnenskiy district court convicted Ukrainian activist Vladimir Balukh to 3 years and 7 months of penal colony settlement and a money penalty amounting to RUB 10 thousand on a charge of ammunition storage.

In his final speech, Ukrainian activist stated that a case against him is framed up due to his political position, however, even such imposed sentence could not force him to love ‘the new Motherland’, as according to him, ‘living on the knees is far worse than dying standing upright.’

As long as such patriots, as Vladimir Balukh, live in Crimea, Russia has no chances to appropriate the stolen peninsula. Still there are a lot of them. Despite of the cruelest pressure, Balukh has not renounced Ukrainian citizenship and defends his principled civil position by all available peaceful means, making a clear statement that Crimea is a territory of Ukraine under international law. For many Crimeans Vladimir Balukh became an example of dignity, courage and dedication to his Motherland. That is why Russian authorities are afraid of and eliminate them.

Today Balukh’s home folks and civil activists help his old mother, raise funds for penalty payment and fight for his release.

Read More

Having captured Ukrainian Crimea, Russia accomplished its century dream – to gain control over sea channels and, in fact, full control over Black Sea. The most powerful fleet among Black Sea countries – the Turkish one – lost its weight at once. Killing zone of missiles launched from Crimean ground fully “seals” the channels, turning Black Sea into Russian internal lake. Only one move left for Russia to gain full domination on the occupied territory – homeland for Muslims and Crimean Tatars – to subdue native people, to break their faith, to trample their honor and dignity.

Moscow always persecuted our brothers in faith in Chechnya, now it does the same in Crimea and Syria, where it tears apart Turkmen Muslims. Putin is a pro in flagellating whole nations as criminals. Once he already spinned this method on Chechens: if you are Chechen – you are criminal. Now, after peninsula annexation, Putin took on Crimean Tatars, who denied him love and loyalty. He left-handedly uses nice words as “depoliticization of Crimean Tatar People” to conceal his doings. He does it step-by-step. First, all efforts was directed towards termination of national leaders in Quriltai-Mejlis system. As all attempts to force Mustapha Dzhemilev and Mejlis Head Refat Chubarov to switch sides failed, they simply were denied to enter Crimea. Being unable to crush in prison the will of Mejlis Head deputies Ilmi Umerov and Akhtem Chyigoz, occupants freed them under pressure of international community and thanks to personal efforts of Turkish president, and also exiled them from Crimea.

Of course, Kremlin would like all Tatars to leave. However, they did not. Then aggressors started the next phase – to oust all who do not fall within “depoliticized” term. Those are clerisy, public and religious figures, lawyers, human rights defenders, journalists. To turn the trick they use both devious methods – they close schools and classes with Crimean Tatar language of study, liquidate Crimean Tatar linguistic faculty in Simferopol University, put pressure on Crimean Tatar channel on Crimean TV – and rude ones – bullying, beating, repressions, prosecution under false charges, pressure on relatives. It has to be said that occupation authorities and their local proxies succeeded in this. Now they want to finally frighten those, who remained. That is the third phase of so-called “depoliticization”.

Namely, very dangerous phenomenon can be observed on this phase: after politics (prohibition of Mejlis), the whip is used on religion. All Muslims of Crimea, the majority of who are Tatars, undergo repressions, which already became of mass character. The occupants do not even bother to look for evidences – one religious book from “forbidden list” is enough to become “extremist” and to be imprisoned. If political processes in Crimea are used to give a fright, then prosecution for faith – is a far more serious thing. All in all, political preferences can be different. However, when the issue is about ethnicity or faith – it is a low blow, because now any Muslim or Crimean Tatar can be named “extremist” or “terrorist”.

Crimean Tatars could not leave these actions by Russian authorities without response. On October 14, more than 100 people went to the roadsides to protest against police abuse and groundless accusations of Crimean Muslims in terrorism and extremism. “We are not terrorists! Our children are not terrorists!” – read the signs held by young and old people, who are tired to live in constant fear and waiting for Kremlin’s powerbrokers. According to Russian legislation, one-man protest is not forbidden. However, this did not stop “police” and gray men from arresting several dozens of people.

Very emotional, but absolutely just and clearly reflecting the situation in Crimea was the address to Russian president by mother of arrested Abdullaiyev brothers – Diyara Abdullaiyeva: “Stop this violation, humiliation of our people. What are you getting at? Everybody knows – there are no terrorists in Crimea, no such organizations. All organizations are fake, criminal cases and sentences are cooked up. If it is not 1937, our vision is that Crimean Tatars, Muslims are simply put away in such a manner. They can be accused, they can be eliminated, if you are Muslim – you are terrorist. Closed court hearings violate the principles of publicity. It means that they are afraid of truth. We demand to stop persecution of Muslims, to stop repressions of Crimean Tatars, to free Muslims from jails”. Hardly anything could be added to these words.

Read More

Last week the upcoming visit of Romanian president Klaus Iohannis to Ukraine was officially announced. Thus, another potential conflict in clouded relationships between two neighboring states concerning the cancellation of scheduled September visit of Romanian president to Kiev due to the education act adopted by the Ukrainian parliament was successfully overcome.

Bucharest and Kiev have always perceived each other suspiciously. In order to comprehend the background for such suspicion, one should analyze the development of relations between two states for the last period. For the recent couple of decades Ukraine was positioned in Romanian public medium as unfriendly state and agent of Russian interests. Ukrainian authorities in their turn suspected Bucharest in its intention to implement the “Great Romania” project. Amidst mutual suspicions in insincerity, the problems concerning the protection of the rights of Romanian minority in Ukraine and vice versa, continental shelf delimitation in the Black Sea, construing of deep navigable Danube – Black Sea channel on the Ukrainian side of the river estuary as well as situation with Krivoy Rog Ore-Dressing and Processing Enterprise have sharply aggravated.

Currently the state of things has been gradually improving influenced by the new geopolitical reality. Romania takes active steps to rethink its strategy towards neighboring Ukraine. Unlawful Crimea annexation by Russia, as well as initiating full-scale conflict in the east of Ukraine have significantly influenced this process as directly affect the issue of national security and national interests of Romania. If until recently Romania did not have a faith to pro-western orientation of Ukraine assuming dependence of its leading circles from Russia, then after the Crimea annexation and military actions in Donbas Bucharest has rethought the challenges. Militarization of Crimea situated a mere 300 km from the Romanian coast became the principal problem for Romania as well as for other Black sea countries.

New Romanian leader Klaus Iohannis as opposed to his predecessors has no historical burden in his approach and his declamations as for Ukraine making it possible to take steps representing the final end of the times of mutual distrust in relations between two neighboring states. Few knows that Romania was among the first EU states which ratified the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine and shall be one of five EU states which insist not merely on prolongation but on reinforcement of sanctions against Russia. The fact of Romanian support to Ukrainian army in getting the hang of counteracting cyber threats and lobby of Ukrainian interests in NATO is also of little notice.

As NATO member, Romania is a leader in developing countermeasures in respect of Russian provocative actions in the Black sea such as creation NATO Black Sea Fleet in partnership with Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey. Ukraine also declared its wish to attach to this initiative. Thus, Romania, as well as NATO and EU in its face need Ukraine as interlink in promotion of regional safety.

Pro-European Ukraine today has the same purposes as formerly Romania had: NATO and EU membership. Romania proves able and must share experience and help avoiding sad mistakes on this difficult way. Primarily the question is military and technical cooperation and sharing experience in military field: Romania may teach Ukraine by NATO standards and Ukraine in turn may share valuable experience achieved in Donbas.

The forthcoming visit of Romanian president Klaus Iohannis to Ukraine will fuel the development of bilateral relations between Bucharest and Kiev and will work as a clear sign for Kremlin which persevere attempts to force a wedge between Romania and Ukraine and use Romania-Ukraine outstanding problems for implementation of aggressive foreign policy.

Read More

On October 17, 2017 several hundred Ukrainians came out to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine to support the protest action organized by the public organizations and opposition political parties. Participants of the action claimed the establishment of the anti-corruption court, the abolishment of deputies’ immunity as well as adoption of the law on elections by public party lists.

By all means, all this demands are reasonable. Respective draft laws are pending their hearing in the parliament.

Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Andrey Parubiy assured the protesters that the draft laws on the restriction of deputies’ immunity and reformation of electoral system will be put to the vote in the parliament in the nearest future.

Therefore, that is unclear, why the protests continue, given that the adoption of the respective laws is an issue of a short term? Possibly, the purpose of the action lies beyond the implementation of the demands which has been put forward by the protesters?

The assumption about Russian intrusion into Ukrainian internal affairs through organizational, financial, methodological and other support to certain political forces pursuing the aim to put the heat on the state authorities through this protest action in front of the Ukrainian parliament is growing increasingly stronger.

Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Arsen Avakov stated that former deputies of the Ukrainian parliament from the Viktor Yanukovich’s team, who presently reside in Russia, stand behind the financing of the tent camp in front of the Ukrainian parliament.

In his arguments he refers to the fragment of radio program of “Govorit Moskva” radio station, where former deputy from the Party of Regions Vladimir Oleynik admitted that he personally finances one of such tent, which means he makes money contributions for “maintenance of the tent, procurement of foodstuff and support of protesters’ families.”

Various international experts and observers also believe that organisation of such protest actions pursues quite certain purpose: to aggravate social and political tension in society, undermine the creditability of the acting government and destabilize the situation in the country which has already lost the part of its territory and appears weakened by the war at the east. According to them, that is political forces financed by Moscow who most probably stay behind the incitement of protest moods. Let alone the only fact that, as is commonly known, committing such actions is usual for Moscow. There is a lot of evidence in support of the fact that Kremlin actively supports and funds extreme right organisations and opposition forces not only in Ukraine, but also in many European states. Reputable international editions have published a great number of materials about Moscow’s involvement into the bribery of voters in France, inspiration of Dutch referendum, intrusion into presidential election campaign in the USA, attempt of rebellion in Montenegro, support of evidently pro-Russian forces in Moldova, funding of separatist movements in the EU states, etc. And now here is an attempt to organise fake Maidan in front of Ukrainian parliament.

Read More