The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPaul Craig Roberts Archive
Update of Minsk Peace Deal
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In my last column I provided reasons for believing that the deal will fail. I saw a larger downside for Russia and the Donetsk and Luhansk republics because Putin and the break-away provinces will be blamed. English is the world language, and this enables Washington and its presstitutes to control the explanation.

The Saker and I are in agreement that the provisions of the peace deal are ridiculous and cannot and will not be implemented. However, The Saker sees an advantage for the republics in the provision, if implemented, to remove heavy weapons from the conflict zones. The Saker’s viewpoint is worth knowing. Whereas I have stressed that the conflict could be ended by Russia accepting the republics’ requests for unification with Russia and that the longer the conflict is drawn out the more the West can demonize Putin and the break-away republics, Saker sees the conflict ending this year with the economic, military, and political collapse of Ukraine. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40979.htm

Alexander Mercouris makes the point that one positive feature of the Minsk agreement,
which isn’t actually a deal or an agreement, is that Europe is now involved and opposes Washington’s plan to escalate the military conflict. He writes that the outcome in Ukraine depends on what the Europeans do, a point with which I concur. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40967.htm

It is difficult to believe that European governments are not aware that the entire Ukraine crisis is a Washington orchestration. Now that Europeans are beginning to realize the risk and recklessness in Washington’s aggressive hostility toward Russia, Europeans might develop an independent foreign policy, as opposed to lining up with Washington, and cast off their vassalage. If this were to happen, Washington’s hegemonic aggression would cease to have enablers. The Evil Empire would begin its break-up, and the chances for peace would improve.

(Republished from PaulCraigRoberts.org by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Russia, Ukraine 
Hide 16 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Kiza says:

    Gee, I wish I could explain to PCR that “an independent foreign policy” of Europe will never be. It is true that Ukraine is very close to an economic, military, and political collapse, but the US can always do a QE (print more godzillions of US$) and prop Ukraine up enough to continue being a festering sore on the Russian border. War was the Plan B when the US orchestrated the coup, but now it is the only Plan A – War to the Last Ukrainian.

    No, no lasting peace in 2015. Who knows when. No peace until the US or Russia collapse.

    • Replies: @Hail
  2. I am really interested in how the US will be able to justify their interference in the Ukraine as self defence. It must be painfully obvious to anyone who has watched the deployment of US forces overseas for the last 50 years that it always ends in failure. I think the reason is that the average American politician does not know the difference between defence and offence.
    I am sure the American armed forces could defend the US from any threats on their shores. As they have the largest armed forces in the world that is, to me, a given. However, with all this wonderful technology when they are sent overseas they are lost and incompetent. Why is this ? I think it is because they have been brainwashed in to believing they are fighting in defence of their country.However, when the US soldiers look around they see nothing that resembles their homeland and wonder what the hell they are doing there.
    It should be remembered that Napoleon and Hitler attempted to conquer Russia through the Ukraine and it failed miserably for both. The US forces interference overseas for the past 50 years have failed miserably so why would they be setting themselves up repeat the exercise in the Ukraine? If you stop hitting your head against a brick wall the pain goes away !

    • Replies: @Ed
  3. Hail says: • Website
    @Kiza

    when the US orchestrated the coup

    PCR: “the entire Ukraine crisis is a Washington orchestration.

    Oh, those Ukrainians couldn’t have orchestrated their own coup! No way. *Only* the USA (and Russia) have agency in Ukraine. Those Ukies really can’t possibly ever influence events…in their own country…let’s look for (or, quicker, assume and allege) a vast, secretive, transoceanic political conspiracy by the CIA pulling all the strings.

    Oh, those Ukranians wouldn’t be fighting a war against Russian secessionist rebels if the USA hadn’t “orchestrated” the war!

    This thinking is actually rather paranoid when looked at in the light of day. It calls to mind the wildest of conspiracy theories about the Jews. Just replace “Jews” with “the USA” and that about sums up most of PCR’s columns these days, sadly. IMO.

  4. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Bill Blizzard and his Men"] says:

    I hope Saker is right….but…never underestimate the evil of Victoria Nuland…Susan Rice…and the ugly Irish Skank Samantha Powers….there is no antiwar movement in the USA…

    • Replies: @professor chops
  5. Now that Europeans are beginning to realize the risk and recklessness in Washington’s aggressive hostility toward Russia, Europeans might develop an independent foreign policy, as opposed to lining up with Washington, and cast off their vassalage

    Fairy tale thinking. For that to happen, there’d have to be a fairly clean sweep out of office of political forces wedded to, and owned by, NATO political institutions; within the most important players in Europe, particularly Germany. Meanwhile, Germans cling to ‘mutti’ like frightened children and Merkel is not only cowardly in relation to the USA, she cannot think on her feet, cannot think creatively, and above all, is deeply complicit in undermining Ukraine and provoking Russia.

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/02/12/mutti-piggies-and-the-minsk-peace-accord/

    This one resolves with the crumbling of the status quo in contemporary European political institutions and no one knows where or how the rabbit will pop out of the bushes, the fate of the fox or what happens with the disconcerted hounds baying in all directions

  6. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Bill Blizzard and his Men"] says:

    PCR

    You and Saker are missing the point:there is going top be an incident at sea between the Conservative Orthodox Christian Russian Navy and the homo friendly-anti-Christian Admiral Mike Mullins US Navy….possibly very soon..

    The US Navy=A Global Force for Global Homo-Pedophile Filth!!!!!!….what do you think was going on over a Subic Bay for all those years……

    1962=2015…..HERE”S MIRV!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  7. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Bill Blizzard and his Men"] says:

    Ugly Irish Skank Samantha Powers=anti-Adiemus for Ukraine……..The testosterone-flushed violent bulldyke Hillary Clinton also………

  8. Ed says:
    @Silver Miner

    The first paragraph of Silver Miner’s comment is worth repeating. One flaw in how the American elites are running their strategy is that whatever they are trying to do with the military is being sold to the American public and the military itself as defense. By “defense”, people think in terms of defending the United States itself from foreign occupation, and maybe American institutions from ideological threats. Obviously this doesn’t have much to do with the Fertile Crescent, Eastern Europe, Central Asia, or whatever. Actually, there is evidence that the elites don’t care much for American institutions or defending the territory of the US itself from foreign infiltration (I’m referencing toleration of high levels of illegal immigration). But by being so secretive of whatever the real objectives of these interventions, I think they are secretive even with high ranking military officials, it means the execution is really confused.

    With the second paragraph, I have a nitpick. Napoleon wasn’t trying to conquer Russia through the Ukraine, he went straight for Moscow. Hitler was trying to conquer the Ukraine for its mineral resources. Actually Napoleon’s objectives seem to have been defensive, to destroy the Russian armies that were preparing to attack his empire, and the Russians drew him successfully too far into Russia for him to sustain his armies. This is a nitpick. Both Ukraine and Iraq are strategic tar babies, they are resource rich areas with no natural defenses. They are not difficult to conquer, but to hang on to them, you pretty much wind up having to control all the neighboring areasa.

  9. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Hail

    On the other hand, there are certain white nationalist and right-wing HBD types like yourself who wish to minimize the geopolitical dimension of the broader conflict or competition between the US and Russia. They want to believe that the parties in this conflict that they identify with, certain right-wing Ukrainian nationalist elements, are driving events.

    • Replies: @Hail
  10. Hail says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    Every conflict is more complicated than one small cabal “driving events”.

  11. @War for Blair Mountain

    Together with Jan Psaki, the four-horse faced women of the apocalypse. Maybe there is something to those old holy scribblings after all!

  12. MarkU says:
    @Hail

    Re: “Oh, those Ukrainians couldn’t have orchestrated their own coup! No way……………..”

    A ham fisted strawman if ever I saw one. No one is saying that the Ukrainians couldn’t orchestrate a coup, PCR is saying that they didn’t, a small but vital distinction.

  13. Svigor says:

    WNs are on team “junta” now? When did that happen?

    Lulz.

  14. Svigor says:

    Why on God’s green Earth Ukrainian WNs would side with America and EU against Russia is their business, I suppose. ‘Course, one might equally wonder why the “Novorussians” would want to be subsumed into Russia.

  15. @Hail

    While Deep State orchestration of the coup is well documented, I will address the idea that Ukrainians are a plausible alternative.

    Real Ukrainians would have just waited for the election to remove Yanukovich. Wasn’t it just a few months away? They would have avoided chaos in their country to include financial collapse, civil war and partition.

    It was the New World Order that HAD to dolchstoss Putin during the Sochi Olympics. They are just that kind of people, and they felt at no other time would Putin be so off guard.

  16. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:

    Real Ukrainians would have just waited for the election to remove Yanukovich. Wasn’t it just a few months away? They would have avoided chaos in their country to include financial collapse, civil war and partition.

    It was very, very clear within Ukraine that there would be no free elections later on and the calls for such were just a stalling technique. Yanukovich was losing horribly in the polls to each of the main competitors, all of whom promised to prosecute him once they became President. There is no way he would allow that, and everybody knew it. His opponents, supported by a plurality of Ukraine’s people (support for the Revolution vs. Yanukovich was about 40% vs. 20% with the rest indifferent or opposed to both sides – although in the capital a majority supported the overthrow), saw a chance to get rid of Yanukovich, and took that chance.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Paul Craig Roberts Comments via RSS