Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


(29,876 posts)
Tue Jun 7, 2016, 06:01 PM Jun 2016

Russia Deploys Troops Westward As Standoff With NATO Deepens

Source: Reuters

Russia is building an army base near its border with Ukraine, the latest in a chain of new military sites along what the Kremlin sees as its frontline in a growing confrontation with NATO.

While there have been no clashes between the former Cold War rivals, Russia is building up forces on its western frontiers at a time when the NATO alliance is staging major military exercises and increasing deployments on its eastern flank.

A Reuters reporter who visited the Russian town of Klintsy, about 50 km (30 miles) from Ukraine, saw a makeshift army camp, large numbers of newly-arrived servicemen and military vehicles.

Last year, Reuters also reported on construction of two other bases further to the south on Russia's border with Ukraine.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-base-bryansk-idUSKCN0YT1PN

Moscow Calls NATO Buildup In E. Europe ‘Unjustified’ As Largest Drills Since Cold War Kick Off


Speaking to journalists on Monday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated, “I am convinced that every serious and honest politician is well aware that Russia will never invade any NATO member. We have no such plans.”

He asserted that “there are no threats in this part of the world whatsoever, that would justify [NATO’s] build-up here.”

In the meantime, Lavrov said, NATO’s decision to move its military infrastructure closer to Russia’s borders and accept new members will be seen in a negative light in Moscow. “Here, Russia’s sovereign right to ensure its security will come into force, [making use] of methods adequate to [respond to] today’s challenges.”

The very existence of NATO as an organization is no threat to Russia, he said, which is not the case when it comes to the bloc’s “practical actions” in terms of moving its military infrastructure closer to Russian borders, or using military force which violates international law, “as it was in cases of Libya and Yugoslavia.”

However, NATO’s leadership has already said there will be no changes to stationing more troops in Poland after the Warsaw Summit, sending “a clear signal that an attack on Poland will be considered an attack on the whole Alliance,” the bloc’s Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg told reporters following his meeting with Polish President Andrzej Duda last Wednesday.

If you listen [to them], you might get a feeling that NATO is a harmless sheep cornered by ‘predators’ such as Russia and other countries disobedient to the US,”] spokesman for Russian Defense Ministry Igor Konashenkov mockingly commented on Monday.


10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies


(29,876 posts)
1. ĎAbsurdí: Russian Envoy To NATO Ridicules Allegations Of Plans To Invade Poland
Tue Jun 7, 2016, 06:02 PM
Jun 2016

Russia has no plans whatsoever to attack Poland and any talk about such a scheme is both absurd and dangerous, Russian envoy to NATO Aleksandr Grushko has said.

“During the NATO secretary general’s recent visit to Poland, officials in this country [Poland] made statements suggesting that from now on Russia would know that any attack on Poland would mean an attack on NATO as a whole. This is completely absurd because they are discussing a non-existent problem. There are no plans for any attacks on Poland,” the diplomat said in an interview with TV channel Russia-24, adding that certain statements about NATO military exercises in the Baltics were “shockingly blatant.”

In the same interview, Grushko emphasized that it was very dangerous for NATO to start carrying out plans based on these false presumptions. “Their policies dwell in surreal reality and the most dangerous thing is that now they start to implement these policies in the form of military planning and preparations on the territories adjacent to our borders.”

READ MORE: NATO needs Russia as major foe to maintain bloc’s relevance - Russia’s envoy

The diplomat stated that the alleged Russian threat to NATO was nothing but a myth, invented in order to justify NATO’s current policies and to bring additional unity to the alliance and the Western political bloc in general.



Response to geek tragedy (Reply #3)


(35,763 posts)
4. The base in Rostov is closer.
Tue Jun 7, 2016, 06:59 PM
Jun 2016

And it's been there for a while.

Then there's the base in Sevastopol'. Also nothing new.

What's a bit new was Lukashenko's less that perfect support for Putin's DNR policy. With the problem that his position is rather less secure than the Ukraine leader's was when it comes to Russia: Most Belorusians in 1920 spoke Belorusian, now the language is a relic in many towns and much of the east of the country, and is threatened. By Russian (keep in mind that anything to protect BR would invariably necessitate violating some perceived rights of the Russian-speakers Putin claims as his own).

Belorusians were to be international and accept the international language of commerce in the area; but Russians were already international enough, it seems.

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
5. Russia promised not to invade or use force against Ukraine back in 1994.
Tue Jun 7, 2016, 09:43 PM
Jun 2016

Obviously, in Russia promises are made to be broken, so the rest of Europe has a good reason to be wary. A promise won't stop Putin from doing whatever he wants - only force will stop him.

Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances from 1994
Source: Wikipedia

According to the memorandum, Russia, the U.S., and the UK confirmed, in recognition of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine becoming parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and in effect abandoning its nuclear arsenal to Russia, that they would:
1. Respect Belarusian, Kazakh and Ukrainian independence and sovereignty and the existing borders.
2. Refrain from the threat or use of force against Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine.
3. Refrain from using economic pressure on Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine in order to influence its politics.

Read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances#Content


(3,982 posts)
6. The year that Crimea voted for independence... And what was the vote for the west
Tue Jun 7, 2016, 10:06 PM
Jun 2016

not to plot a coup and bring in unpopular leadership and cause a constitutional crisis in Ukraine?


(3,982 posts)
7. To understand the events in Ukraine you must understand the "first" Maidan - Orange Revolution 2004
Tue Jun 7, 2016, 10:07 PM
Jun 2016

[font size="2"]To understand how we got to where we are now: You must understand that this effort has been ongoing since at least the beginning of the new century.

The first attempt at affecting "Regime Change" was the orchestration, mostly by neo-cons, of the "Orange Revolution".

The Wests choice in 2004? A man by the name of Victor Yuschenko.

His wife? An American Citizen and Far Right Republican who had worked for the Reagan Administration, had been director at a NeoCon think tank (New Atlantic Initiative) (Victor also worked with this group) and also worked for the far right think tank the Heritage Foundation. "Katherine Chumachenko Yushenko worked in the White House Public Liaison Office where she conducted outreach to various right-wing and anti-communist exile groups in the United States.

A very good summary from a post on an older version of DU Tinoire
There are links on the original page:

Ukraine, Yushchenko, his wife (Bush employee), the US and Soros

"After hearing that the NED had pumped $65 million dollars into this election and that his wife was an American citizen, I thought I'd research this a little. I don't know this handsome US-backed Yushchenko but I'm suspecting that he is going to dismantle the Ukraine Boris-Yeltsin style and sell if off to US & European corporate interests. Germany, France and the US already have their deals in place with him over pipelines, utility companies and national resources.

Just thought I'd throw this information out there so that people can see how these things are done and how the media cooperates into presenting these changes as "spontaneous" changes that the US had nothing to do with.

So here we go. First some of the "meddling" that the media hasn't covered and then in my second post, Yushchenko's "dedicated conservative" US State Department wife.

$61 million for the Ukraine elections to back Yushchenko and $100,000 to the Tsunami victims. Just shameful.

Bush Adminstration Spent $65 Million to Help Opposition in Ukraine

December 10, 2004

By: Matt Kelley
Associated Press

Printer Friendly Version

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration has spent more than $65 million in the past two years to aid political organizations in Ukraine, paying to bring opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko to meet U.S. leaders and helping to underwrite exit polls indicating he won last month's disputed runoff election.


But officials acknowledge some of the money helped train groups and individuals opposed to the Russian-backed government candidate — people who now call themselves part of the Orange revolution.

For example, one group that got grants through U.S.-funded foundations is the Center for Political and Legal Reforms, whose Web site has a link to Yushchenko's home page under the heading "partners." Another project funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development brought a Center for Political and Legal Reforms official to Washington last year for a three-week training session on political advocacy.

The four foundations involved included three funded by the U.S. government: The National Endowment for Democracy, which gets its money directly from Congress; the Eurasia Foundation, which gets money from the State Department, and the Renaissance Foundation, part of a network of charities funded by billionaire George Soros that gets money from the State Department. Other countries involved included Great Britain, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Canada, Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

Grants from groups funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development also went to the International Center for Policy Studies, a think tank that includes Yushchenko on its supervisory board. The board also includes several current or former advisers to Kuchma, however.

IRI, Craner's Republican-backed group, used U.S. money to help Yushchenko arrange meetings with Vice President Dick Cheney , Assistant Secretary of State Richard Armitage and GOP leaders in Congress in February 2003.


the U.S. government, through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), granted millions of dollars to the Poland-America-Ukraine Cooperation Initiative (PAUCI), which is administered by the U.S.-based Freedom House. (note: Very hawkish / Dan Quayle is one of their trustees / other names just as disturbing: http://www.freedomhouse.org/aboutfh/bod.htm )

PAUCI then sent U.S. government funds to numerous Ukrainian non-governmental organizations (NGOs). This would be bad enough and would in itself constitute meddling in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation. But, what is worse is that many of these grantee organizations in Ukraine are blatantly in favor of presidential candidate Viktor Yushchenko.

Consider the Ukrainian NGO International Center for Policy Studies. It is an organization funded by the U.S. government through PAUCI. On its Web site, we discover that this NGO was founded by George Soros' Open Society Institute. And further on we can see that Viktor Yushchenko himself sits on the advisory board!

(reluctant snip)

This May, the Virginia-based private management consultancy Development Associates, Inc., was awarded $100 million by the U.S. government "for strengthening national legislatures and other deliberative bodies worldwide." According to the organization's Web site, several million dollars from this went to Ukraine in advance of the elections.


Note from the USAID page on Ukraine: "Beyond the power sector, USAID plans to identify and assist in removing the obstacles of proper market functioning in other segments of the energy sector such as the privatization of the oil and gas transportation systems."


Yushenko administration lost the presidency 15 months later:

Notably, one of the things that lost him the Presidency only 15 months later was his turn toward the same brand of extreme nationalism. He elevated Stephen Bandera, (a very controversial figure who is revered by extreme factions that Europe and others warned were tied to Social Nationalist Fascist groups) to "Hero" status.

A Fascist Hero in Democratic Kiev



(3,982 posts)
9. History of "The AUTONOMOUS Republic of Crimea" is found easily and refutes the "Narrative"
Tue Jun 7, 2016, 10:11 PM
Jun 2016

Under "Ukraine Period" Heading:


This was followed by a 1992 vote by the Crimean parliament to hold a referendum on independence from Ukraine, which spawned a two-year crisis over the status of Crimea.[15] At the same time, the State Duma of the Russian Federation voted to void the cession of Crimea to Ukraine. In June of the same year, the Ukrainian government in Kiev voted to give Crimea a large amount autonomy as the Autonomous Republic of Crimea within Ukraine. Despite this, fighting between the Crimean government, Russian government, and Ukrainian government continued. In 1994, Russian nationalist Yuri Meshkov won the 1994 Crimean presidential election, and implemented the earlier approved referendum on the status of Crimea.[18][19] 1.3 million people voted in this referendum, 78.4% of whom supported greater autonomy from Ukraine, whilst 82.8% supported allowing dual Russian-Ukrainian citizenship.[20] Later in that same year, the status of Crimea as part of Ukraine was recognised by Russia, which pledged to uphold the territorial integrity of Ukraine in the Budapest Memorandum. This treaty was also signed by the United States, United Kingdom, and France.[21][22] Ukraine revoked the Constitution of Crimea and abolished the office of President of Crimea in 1995.[23] Crimea was granted a new constitution in 1998, which granted lesser autonomy than the previous one.[14][24]

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
10. Funny, I don't remember any NATO tanks rolling into Ukraine.
Tue Jun 7, 2016, 10:27 PM
Jun 2016

There are however, a lot of Russian tanks and soldiers in Ukraine right now. Are they there on vacation or what?

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Russia Deploys Troops Wes...