Rat u Ukrajini

Today's video was filmed by Russian journalists from inside Zolote city administration building.

This signifies that Ukrainian troops indeed fully withdrew from the area. https://t.co/bRDc8szHJa pic.twitter.com/bhUPFEQNrb

— Arrow Intel (@IntelArrow) June 23, 2022

Alchevs'k, Luhansk Oblast, a Russian SAM fails during launch pic.twitter.com/CKZcqZBEvj

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) June 24, 2022

Notxor wrote:Grunf?

Alchevs'k, Luhansk Oblast, a Russian SAM fails during launch pic.twitter.com/CKZcqZBEvj

— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) June 24, 2022

#Ukraine: First officially documented usage of M142 HIMARS in action in Ukraine by Ukrainian forces, targetting Russian forces. pic.twitter.com/QuUenxr2NM

— Arslon Xudosi (@Arslon_Xudosi) June 24, 2022

hmm https://t.co/5z2ElSN8Q0 pic.twitter.com/q8lMkoIWt8

— Russians With Attitude (@RWApodcast) June 24, 2022

“Što se tiče Srbije, Srbi su naša braća. Mi vidimo kakav je nepravedni odnos prema srpskom narodu, i vidimo kakav je sad pritisak na srpski narod, uključujući prije svega posljednju izjavu Scholza, koji je rekao da ukoliko Srbija želi da postane član Evropske unije, mora da prizna Kosovo. Mi razumijemo koliko je bolna trenutna situacija sa Kosovom za vaš narod, ali sve je u stvari jednostavno. Sve će biti Rusija, osim Kosova. Kosovo je Srbija”, izjavio je predsjednik DNR-a, prenose Novosti.

fikret selimbašić wrote:

“Što se tiče Srbije, Srbi su naša braća. Mi vidimo kakav je nepravedni odnos prema srpskom narodu, i vidimo kakav je sad pritisak na srpski narod, uključujući prije svega posljednju izjavu Scholza, koji je rekao da ukoliko Srbija želi da postane član Evropske unije, mora da prizna Kosovo. Mi razumijemo koliko je bolna trenutna situacija sa Kosovom za vaš narod, ali sve je u stvari jednostavno. Sve će biti Rusija, osim Kosova. Kosovo je Srbija”, izjavio je predsjednik DNR-a.

Canada has blocked assets worth $328 million due to the sanctions.

— The Kyiv Independent (@KyivIndependent) June 24, 2022

U petak je gradonačelnica Berlina @FranziskaGiffey imala zakazan video-sastabak sa kijevskim kolegom @Vitaliy_Klychko.

Ćaskali su pola sata, a onda se ispostavilo da to nije Kličko - nego deep fake simulacija pic.twitter.com/XoMERrpiOf

— Nemanja Rujević (@strani_placenik) June 25, 2022

...iz Berlina su pozvali ukrajinskog ambasadora koji je rekao da to nije Kličko.

I sam Kličko je potvrdio da nije on pričao sa Gifaj i sad treba da se vidi kako je razgovor uopšte zakazan.

Na istu foru je urađen i gradonačelnik Madrida.

Počinioci su nepoznati.

— Nemanja Rujević (@strani_placenik) June 25, 2022

President Fernández calls for Argentina's incorporation into the BRICS group | Buenos Aires Times https://t.co/rY3HYOi54Y

— Aza Sydykov (@azasydykov) June 25, 2022

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/causes-and-consequences-ukraine-crisis-203182

The Causes and Consequences of the Ukraine Crisis
The war in Ukraine is a multi-dimensional disaster, which is likely to get much worse in the foreseeable future.

by John J. Mearsheimer


...
I will make two main arguments today.

First, the United States is principally responsible for causing the Ukraine crisis. This is not to deny that Putin started the war and that he is responsible for Russia’s conduct of the war. Nor is it to deny that America’s allies bear some responsibility, but they largely follow Washington’s lead on Ukraine. My central claim is that the United States has pushed forward policies toward Ukraine that Putin and other Russian leaders see as an existential threat, a point they have made repeatedly for many years. Specifically, I am talking about America’s obsession with bringing Ukraine into NATO and making it a Western bulwark on Russia’s border. The Biden administration was unwilling to eliminate that threat through diplomacy and indeed in 2021 recommitted the United States to bringing Ukraine into NATO. Putin responded by invading Ukraine on February 24th of this year.

Second, the Biden administration has reacted to the outbreak of war by doubling down against Russia. Washington and its Western allies are committed to decisively defeating Russia in Ukraine and employing comprehensive sanctions to greatly weaken Russian power. The United States is not seriously interested in finding a diplomatic solution to the war, which means the war is likely to drag on for months if not years. In the process, Ukraine, which has already suffered grievously, is going to experience even greater harm. In essence, the United States is helping lead Ukraine down the primrose path. Furthermore, there is a danger that the war will escalate, as NATO might get dragged into the fighting and nuclear weapons might be used. We are living in perilous times.
...

Where Are We Now & Where Are We Going?

The Ukraine war has been raging for almost four months I would like to now offer some observations about what has happened so far and where the war might be headed. I will address three specific issues: 1) the consequences of the war for Ukraine; 2) the prospects for escalation—to include nuclear escalation; and 3) the prospects for ending the war in the foreseeable future.

This war is an unmitigated disaster for Ukraine. As I noted earlier, Putin made it clear in 2008 that Russia would wreck Ukraine to prevent it from joining NATO. He is delivering on that promise. Russian forces have conquered 20 percent of Ukrainian territory and destroyed or badly damaged many Ukrainian cities and towns. More than 6.5 million Ukrainians have fled the country, while more than 8 million have been internally displaced. Many thousands of Ukrainians—including innocent civilians—are dead or badly wounded and the Ukrainian economy is in shambles. The World Bank estimates that Ukraine’s economy will shrink by almost 50 percent over the course of 2022. Estimates are that approximately 100 billion dollars’ worth of damage has been inflicted on Ukraine and that it will take close to a trillion dollars to rebuild the country. In the meantime, Kyiv requires about $5 billion of aid every month just to keep the government running.

Furthermore, there appears to be little hope that Ukraine will be able to regain use of its ports on the Azov and Black Seas anytime soon. Before the war, roughly 70 percent of all Ukrainian exports and imports—and 98 percent of its grain exports—moved through these ports. This is the basic situation after less than 4 months of fighting. It is downright scary to contemplate what Ukraine will look like if this war drags on for a few more years.

So, what are the prospects for negotiating a peace agreement and ending the war in the next few months? I am sorry to say that I see no way this war ends anytime soon, a view shared by prominent policymakers like General Mark Milley, the Chairman of the JCS, and NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg. The main reason for my pessimism is that both Russia and the United States are deeply committed to winning the war and it is impossible to fashion an agreement where both sides win. To be more specific, the key to a settlement from Russia’s perspective is making Ukraine a neutral state, ending the prospect of integrating Kyiv into the West. But that outcome is unacceptable to the Biden administration and a large portion of the American foreign policy establishment, because it would represent a victory for Russia.

Ukrainian leaders have agency of course, and one might hope that they will push for neutralization to spare their country further harm. Indeed, Zelensky briefly mentioned this possibility in the early days of the war, but he never seriously pursued it. There is little chance, however, that Kyiv will push for neutralization, because the ultra-nationalists in Ukraine, who wield significant political power, have zero interest in yielding to any of Russia’s demands, especially one that dictates Ukraine’s political alignment with the outside world. The Biden administration and the countries on NATO’s eastern flank—like Poland and the Baltic states—are likely to support Ukraine’s ultra-nationalists on this issue.

To complicate matters further, how does one deal with the large swaths of Ukrainian territory that Russia has conquered since the war started, as well as Crimea’s fate? It is hard to imagine Moscow voluntarily giving up any of the Ukrainian territory it now occupies, much less all of it, as Putin’s territorial goals today are probably not the same ones he had before the war. At the same time, it is equally hard to imagine any Ukrainian leader accepting a deal that allows Russia to keep any Ukrainian territory, except possibly Crimea. I hope I am wrong, but that is why I see no end in sight to this ruinous war.
...
As I have emphasized, Putin and his lieutenants believe that Ukraine joining the West is an existential threat to Russia that must be eliminated. In practical terms, that means Russia must win its war in Ukraine. Defeat is unacceptable. The Biden administration, on the other hand, has stressed that its goal is not only to decisively defeat Russia in Ukraine, but also to use sanctions to inflict massive damage on the Russian economy. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin has emphasized that the West’s goal is to weaken Russia to the point where it could not invade Ukraine again. In effect, the Biden administration is committed to knocking Russia out of the ranks of the great powers. At the same time, President Biden himself has called Russia’s war in Ukraine a “genocide” and charged Putin with being a “war criminal” who should face a “war crimes trial” after the war. Such rhetoric hardly lends itself to negotiating an end to the war. After all, how do you negotiate with a genocidal state?

American policy has two significant consequences. For starters, it greatly amplifies the existential threat Moscow faces in this war and makes it more important than ever that it prevails in Ukraine. At the same time, it means the United States is deeply committed to making sure that Russia loses. The Biden administration has now invested so much in the Ukraine war—both materially and rhetorically—that a Russian victory would represent a devastating defeat for Washington.

...
Conclusion

Simply put, the ongoing conflict in Ukraine is a colossal disaster, which as I noted at the start of my talk, will lead people all around the world to search for its causes. Those who believe in facts and logic will quickly discover that the United States and its allies are mainly responsible for this train wreck. The April 2008 decision to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO was destined to lead to conflict with Russia. The Bush administration was the principal architect of that fateful choice, but the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations have doubled down on that policy at every turn and America’s allies have dutifully followed Washington’s lead. Even though Russian leaders made it perfectly clear that bringing Ukraine into NATO would be crossing “the brightest of red lines,” the United States refused to accommodate Russia’s deepest security concerns and instead moved relentlessly to make Ukraine a Western bulwark on Russia’s border.

The tragic truth is that if the West had not pursued NATO expansion into Ukraine, it is unlikely there would be a war in Ukraine today and Crimea would still be part of Ukraine. In essence, Washington played the central role in leading Ukraine down the path to destruction. History will judge the United States and its allies harshly for their remarkably foolish policy on Ukraine. Thank you.

Today's Putin-Lukashenko meeting:

> Lukashenko claims Lithuania's "blockade" of Kaliningrad is a declaration of war
> Lukashenko suggested "taking mirror measures in the military sphere on the actions of the West"
> Putin announced transfer of Iskander-M systems to Belarus

— UkraineWorld (@ukraine_world) June 25, 2022

Putin Pledges Nuclear-Capable Missiles for Belarus as Ukraine War Grinds On
BY XANDER LANDEN ON 6/25/22 AT 4:25 PM EDT

Russian President Vladimir Putin told Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko Saturday that Russia will provide Belarus with nuclear-capable missile systems.

According to Reuters, during a meeting in St. Petersburg, Russia, Lukashenko raised concerns about the "aggressive" and "confrontational" actions of neighboring countries Poland and Lithuania. He also discussed nuclear-armed flights near the Belarusian border being conducted by the U.S.-led NATO alliance, and reportedly asked Putin to help his country with a "symmetrical response."

Reuters reported that Putin said such a response wasn't necessary, but that his country would transfer "Iskander-M tactical missile systems to Belarus, which can use both ballistic and cruise missiles, both in conventional and nuclear versions."

Last month, the Russian president sold nuclear-capable Iskander missiles and S-400 missile systems to Belarus.

"We made an agreement with Putin. We bought from you a number of these Iskanders and S-400s we needed, and armed our Army," Lukashenko said at the time. "Now we have a completely different army with such weapons. At the very least, this weapon can cause unacceptable, colossal damage."

Belarus has been one of Russia's closest allies since Putin invaded Ukraine in late February.

On Saturday, Ukrainian intelligence officials claimed that Russia fired missiles from Belarus in an effort to "drag" its ally into the war.

"This is the first case of an air strike across Ukraine directly from the territory of Belarus. Today's shelling is directly related to the efforts of the Kremlin authorities to drag Belarus into the war in Ukraine as a direct participant," the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine said in a statement.

Last week, Mark Voyger of the Transatlantic Defence and Security Program at the Center for European Analysis, noted that the Belarusian military is scheduled to hold training exercises on the Ukrainian border later this month as well as next month, which has raised concerns.

"The concern is that Putin has been trying to put pressure on [Belarusian President Alexander] Lukashenko and force him to take a more aggressive stance to launch more aggressive actions out of Belarus, involving Belarusian troops," Voyger told Express UK.

"So far, we've seen the Russian troops enter Belarus and then in February they attacked Ukraine from the North. But in this case, Russia is suffering from shortages of soldiers so any additional troops would add greatly to their potential," he added.

Newsweek has reached out to the Russian Foreign Ministry for comment.

https://www.newsweek.com/putin-pledges-nuclear-capable-missiles-belarus-ukraine-war-grinds-1719206?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1656190133

The Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, also known as the U.S. Helsinki Commission, is an independent commission of the U.S. Federal Government.

DECOLONIZING RUSSIA
A Moral and Strategic Imperative
Russia’s barbaric war on Ukraine—and before that on Syria, Libya, Georgia, and Chechnya—has exposed the Russian Federation’s viciously imperial character to the entire world. Its aggression also is catalyzing a long-overdue conversation about Russia’s interior empire, given Moscow’s dominion over many indigenous non-Russian nations, and the brutal extent to which the Kremlin has taken to suppress their national self-expression and self-determination.
Serious and controversial discussions are now underway about reckoning with Russia’s fundamental imperialism and the need to “decolonize” Russia for it to become a viable stakeholder in European security and stability. As the successor to the Soviet Union, which cloaked its colonial agenda in anti-imperial and anti-capitalist nomenclature, Russia has yet to attract appropriate scrutiny for its consistent and oftentimes brutal imperial tendencies.