PoliticalEssays

April 19, 2014

WORLD-TYRANT WORLD a/o 04 18 14

Filed under: news — jaspar @ 8:52 am

 

 

 

 

 

 

WORLD-TYRANT WORLD a/o 04 18 14 

 

 

 

 

 

EXCERPTS from: Direct Line with Vladimir Putin 

 

 

17 April 2014, 15:55, Moscow 

 

http://eng.news.kremlin.ru/news/7034/print

 

 

 

TATYANA STOLYAROVA: Yes, it’s true. Let me remind you about a letter from Russian cultural figures who supported Vladimir Putin and Russia’s stance on Crimea.  As of now, the letter has been signed by over 500 people. The letter received a strong public response. 

 

 

Karen Shakhnazarov is here today in this studio.  You signed the letter.  How would you explain your view? 

 

 

KAREN SHAKHNAZAROV: It was obvious to me, and I said so repeatedly.  I have two reasons.  The first reason is personal.  Maybe it is not important to someone else, but it is to me.  My late father was one of the soldiers who liberated Crimea.  He was 20 at the time. He was a reconnaissance commander in an artillery brigade.  He participated in the storm of Sevastopol.  By the way, he was an ethnic Armenian. Neither he nor his comrades had any doubt that it was a Russian city.  So he would not have understood me at all if I had taken any other stance. 

 

 

The second reason is probably more important.  In the circumstances when, as I see it, the Ukrainian statehood ceased to exist, there was no reason to deprive the people of Crimea of the right to determine their fate.  Speaking of which, Mr Putin said that the Ukrainian parliament is partially legitimate.  I don’t really agree with that because how can a parliament be legitimate if it abrogated its own constitution?  I personally think there is no legitimate power in Ukraine now. 

 

 

Therefore, the people of Crimea had every right to determine their destiny.  Of course, I understand that it was a difficult decision which has *many* international and political implications. 

 

 

So I have a question for you, Mr Putin. 

 

 

In the past 10 years, we have been forging ties with the People’s Republic of China, and I can see that the convergence is mutual.  In this situation, is it possible to formalise this partnership as a military and political union? 

 

 

VLADIMIR PUTIN: First of all, thank you for you stance on Crimea and your support. 

 

 

Speaking of our relations with China, they are progressing very successfully in terms of trust and collaboration, which are unprecedented.  This includes political cooperation and *our shared views on international affairs and global security, which is the basis for these inter-governmental relations*.  We are neighbours and allies as well, in a sense.  We have not raised the question of a military and political union. 

 

 

Generally, I think that the bloc mentality is a thing of the past.  NATO was established as a counterbalance to the [REAL] Soviet Union and to the Soviet Union’s policy in Eastern Europe.  The Warsaw Pact was signed in response.  The [later FAKE] Soviet Union ceased to exist, but NATO remains.  We are told it is changing and becoming more of a political organisation.  But Article 5 is still in effect, which is an article on mutual military support.  Who does NATO act against?  Why is it expanding towards our borders? 

 

 

Are there plans to establish new blocs?  I don’t know; we haven’t thought about this.  But it is absolutely clear that we will be expanding collaboration with China. 

 

Our trade with the United States is 27.5 [billion], but trade with China is 87 billion, and it is growing.  And experts will agree that China is gradually becoming the number one economic power. The question is when it will happen: in 15, 20 or 25 years.  But everybody understands that it is inevitable. 

 

 

With China’s population of almost 1.5 billion and its modernised economy, this is basically an accomplished fact.  Therefore, we will certainly continue to develop relations with China.  We have never had such trust-based relations [as now] in the military industry.  We began holding joint drills at sea and on land, in both China and the Russian Federation.  This gives us reason to assume that Russian-Chinese relations will be a significant factor in global policy and will substantially influence modern international relations. 

 

 

. . . 

 

 

ROMAN KUZNETSOV: Good afternoon, Mr Putin.  My name is Roman. 

 

 

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Hello, Roman. 

 

 

ROMAN KUZNETSOV: Are you planning to send a limited contingent of troops to southeastern Ukraine to protect its Russian-speaking population?  Thank you. 

 

 

VLADIMIR PUTIN: You know, despite the events in Crimea, we should not lose our heads, but should proceed from realities. 

 

What are these realities today? First, we must admit that the ethnic composition of Crimea differs from that of southeastern Ukraine. These territories, as I just said, were transferred to Ukraine in the mid-1920s, and in 1954, Crimea was annexed to Ukraine for some reason [by the traitor Khrushchov] as well. 

 

 

The ethnic composition of the population there is approximately 50-50. I have already mentioned that the final decision to return Crimea to the Russian Federation was only based on the results of the referendum.  When I saw these results, and saw for myself that almost all residents voted for joining Russia, I repeat, we had no other choice and there could have been no other decision. 

 

 

As for what is happening in southeastern Ukraine, we don’t know for sure.  But we believe that we ought to do everything we can to help these people defend their rights and determine their fate on their own.  *This is what we will fight for*.  Let me remind you that the Federation Council of Russia gave the President the right to use the Armed Forces in Ukraine. 

 

I very much hope that I will not have to exercise this right and that, through political and diplomatic means, we will be able to resolve all the pressing, if not to say burning, issues in Ukraine. 

 

 

AND 

 

 

MARIA SITTEL: Mr President, there is a difficult situation right now not only in the southeastern regions of Ukraine, but also in Transnistria.  It is blocked by Moldova on one side and by the newly self-proclaimed Kiev authorities on the other.  Here’s a text message: “What are ways to resolve the current situation in Transnistria and what is Russia’s stance on it?”  I would like to recall that just yesterday its parliament asked Russia to recognise *the republic’s* independence. 

 

 

VLADIMIR PUTIN: This is one of the most complex problems that we inherited after the collapse of the [FAKE] Soviet Union.  First of all, the population of the republic is over 500,000 people, if I’m not mistaken.  People there express pro-Russian sentiments and a large number of Russian citizens live in Transnistria. 

 

They have their own views on how to build their future and their fate.  It would be nothing more than a display of democracy if we were to allow those people do as they wish.  Of course, we need to maintain dialogue with both Moldova and Ukraine, to boost talks within the 5+2 format, which includes Moldova, Transnistria and five other states that are taking part in the settlement process.  I think that the blockade should be lifted without delay; the residents of the republic are feeling its negative consequences both on the part of Moldova and Ukraine. 

 

Nationalist armed groups have already gathered on the border between Transnistria and Ukraine; such developments must be stopped without delay.  In the long run, people should be allowed to decide their own destiny. This is what we and our partners are going to work on, taking into account the interests of the residents of Transnistria, of course.

 

 

. . . 

 

 

TATYANA REMEZOVA: Mr President, there was a caller with another very interesting question.  I will read the message: “Russia has annexed Crimea by force.  Does that mean that power is the only guarantee of a state’s sovereignty these days?” 

 

 

VLADIMIR PUTIN: Russia did *not* annex Crimea by force.  Russia created conditions-– with the help of special armed groups and the Armed Forces, I will say it straight-– but *only for the free expression of the will of the people living in Crimea and Sevastopol*. 

 

 

It was the people themselves who made this decision.  Russia answered their call and welcomed the decision of Crimea and Sevastopol.  This was natural, and it could not have been any other way. 

 

 

As for the power factor in international relations, it has always existed and will always exist.  That’s a different issue, and 

 

 

the thing is that countries, taking into account that power plays a significant role in international affairs, should develop and strengthen, *based on their common sense*, such rules of conduct which would be stable and would allow for negotiating, compromising and balancing the interests of a state and its people on the international arena without using this power. 

 

 

The events in Crimea themselves have nothing to do with this. 

 

 

Let’s recall what happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and other regions.  In my opinion, when the world becomes unipolar, or when someone [The World Tyrant] tries to make it so, then this one pole has *the illusion that all issues can be settled through power*. 

 

And only when there is a balance of power does the desire to negotiate appear.  I hope that we will be moving along the path to strengthen international law. 

 

 

. . . 

 

 

 

SERGEI LUKAS: Mr Putin, who stands to profit from the overblown myth that Russia’s Armed Forces are preparing for an invasion in Ukraine?  What goals are pursued by those who want to set us against our brothers, neighbours and European partners?  And can we openly invite all those willing to visit our cross-border regions?  Thank you. 

 

 

VLADIMIR PUTIN: The intention to split Russia and Ukraine, to separate what is essentially a single nation in many ways, has been an issue of international politics for centuries.  If you recall the statements uttered [in the 1920’s] by the White movement leaders, you’ll see that regardless [of] their political disagreements with the Bolsheviks, they never had even the slightest thought about a possible division between Ukraine and Russia, as they always perceived them as part of a common, united space and a single nation.  And they were absolutely right. 

 

 

But today we’re are living in separate countries. And, unfortunately, this policy of division, of pulling apart and weakening both parts of a single nation continues. There are enough forces in the world that are afraid of our strength, “our hugeness,” as one of our sovereigns [a Czar] said.  So, they seek to divide us into parts, this is a well-known fact. 

 

 

Look at what they did with Yugoslavia: they cut it into small pieces and are now manipulating everything that can be manipulated there, which is almost anything. 

 

 

Apparently, someone would like to do the same with us, and if you look at what’s happening, you’ll be able to answer your own question about who [The World Tyrant] is doing what. 

 

 

[ MORE TO COME FROM DIRECT LINE ! ] 

 

 

 

 

Speaking about rights, but aiming for chaos 

 

 

 

Hassan Abou Taleb 

 

 

 

Wednesday 16 Apr 2014 

 

 

 

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContentPrint/4/0/98860/Opinion/0/Speaking-about-rights,-but-aiming-for-chaos.aspx

 

 

 

 

We all know Egypt is being targetted and it is no longer a mere suspicion or hypothetical conspiracy theory but a reality we live day and night. 

 

This [reality] includes 

 

statements and threats by the [Muslim Brotherhood] terrorist alliance, 

 

sabotage and murder, and 

 

the ultimate goal —-that will never materialise, God willing-— of pushing Egypt into chaos and ruin. 

Some of the plotting against Egypt takes place in 

 

major world capitals [The World Tyrant / NATO] and 

 

global or regional organisations that were created to primarily protect people and their lives. 

 

Unfortunately, they [for example: the Euro-Mediterranean Network for Human Rights (EMNHR)] have become a platform for directed criticism that serves higher global interests [The World Tyrant / NATO]. 

 

The slogans of human rights have become *a tool for distortion and moral harm* in society, not a vehicle for protecting the people’s simple right to a decent life. 

 

Unfortunately, some of these institutions are hostage to only one point of view [that of The World Tyrant] and do not do their job of finding out the truth, so as to uphold the right to life of a people who are in the line of fire of vile terrorism -—a job that is [better: was supposedly] the foundation of the global human rights movement since its inception.

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: