Peskov denies gas boycott of Finland

Brussels 13.05.2022 Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov called some Finnish media reports about the termination of Russian gas deliveries to Finland “most likely just another fake.”

While conducting a press briefing in Moscow, Peskov recalled that the media mentioned Finland’s stance to join NATO as a reason for a possible rupture on supplies of energy resources and reminded that Russia delivers gas to many NATO countries, including Germany.

“Gazprom supplies gas to various consumers in Europe, including countries that are members of NATO. Gazprom has repeatedly demonstrated its reliability as a company that supplies energy resources to the European continent. Therefore, these reports are most likely just another fake,” the Peskov said.

However Peskov made a reservation, recalling the decree by Russian President Vladimir Putin that prescribed “unfriendly countries” to pay in rubles for Russian energy resources, and added that if Finnish companies do not abide by the new requirements, then “the decree will be implemented.”

“It is necessary to make it clear with Gazprom how it is with the payment regime. Because there is a decree of the president on a new gas payment regime. I do not know the nuances of how Finnish companies pay, when they need to make payments, and whether they carry them according to the new rules,” he said.

Baltics non-nuclear status in question

Brussels 16.04.2022 Russia is warning of new nuclear deployments in the Baltics if Finland and Sweden join NATO, as the two countries discussing a perspective to becoming part of the military alliance.

Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council and former President of Russia, wrote in a Telegram post on Thursday, April 14, that “there can be no talk of non-nuclear status for the Baltic” if Finland and Sweden join NATO.

The chairman said that should Finland and Sweden join NATO, Moscow would need to “seriously strengthen the grouping of land forces and air defense, deploy significant naval forces in the waters of the Gulf of Finland.”

“In this case, it will no longer be possible to talk about any nuclear-free status of the Baltic — the balance must be restored,” he added, according to CNBC.

Medvedev said that previously “Russia has not taken such measures and was not going to,” according to Reuters.

“If our hand is forced well … take note it wasn’t us who proposed this,” he added.

Borrell regrets Ukraine NATO membership promise

Strasbourg 13.03.2022 Anna van Densky The West made a mistake by promising Ukraine NATO membership, the EU top diplomat Josep Borrell said in an interview with LCI TV channel, France.

“There are moments in which we could have reacted better. For example, we proposed things that we could not guarantee, in particular Ukraine’s accession to NATO. This was never realised. I think it was a mistake to make promises that we could not fulfil,” the diplomat explained.

The head of European diplomacy also admitted that the West had made mistakes when building relations with Russia. “Thus, we lost the opportunity to bring Russia closer to the West in order to deter it,” Borrell continued.

Interviewed in Versailles just before the opening of the Summit of the 27, Josep Borrell said he believed that “Russia is bombarding indiscriminately”. According to him, “Mariupol is undoubtedly a war crime, but it’s not just that hospital. Russia is incapable of taking the cities, the Ukrainian resistance is very strong, so it is doing as it did in Syria or Chechnya, it bombs. The Russian army is an artillery army. So it bombs, it bombs, indiscriminately, sometimes a hospital, sometimes a pavement of a house.”

On February 24 President Vladimir Putin announced a special Russian military operation in response to a request for help from the heads of the Donbass self-proclaimed Republics. The head of state has pointed out that Moscow had no plans of occupying Ukrainian territories, but aims to “de-militarise and de-nazify” the neighbour. Later he added that one of Moscow’s key demands was that Ukraine remain neutral, and rejected plans to join NATO. As Director of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service Sergey Naryshkin had earlier confirmed, it is critical for Russia because it is the “minimum territorial barrier” the country needs to preserve the existing security system.

Russia-Ukraine: Olaf Scholz ready to react

Brussels 07.02.2022 Anna van Densky Germany and NATO allies are ready to take “all necessary steps” if Russia “invades” Ukraine, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said in an interview published by the Washington Post on Sunday, February 6, when asked if the German government could halt the process to open the Nord Stream2 pipeline.

“We are ready to take together with our allies all necessary steps,” Scholz clarified. “We have a very clear agreement with the United States government on gas transit and energy sovereignty in Europe.”

“We already also agreed that we will support Ukraine,” Scholz went on to say. “Also, it is absolutely clear that in a situation like this all options are on the table.”

“I will not get into any specifics, but our answer will be united and decisive,” the chancellor added.

“We are working very hard with our allies in NATO and in the European Union to make clear what we can do in the specific situation,” Scholz said. “But we are also clear about the necessary strategic ambiguity.”

“This is also critical for giving this strong message that it will be very costly — so they cannot go to a computer and count whether it will be too expensive or not,” he said. “It would be too high a price to intervene in Ukraine.”

“On the other hand, that we are working very hard to use all the channels of talks that we have now: talks between the United States and Russia, the NATO-Russia Council, the OSCE and obviously it’s also the Normandy format,” the chancellor said.

The interview came out ahead of a visit by Scholz to the US where he is set to meet with US President Joe Biden on February 7.

There has been a various statements in the West and Kiev lately that Russia could invade Ukraine soon. Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said they were unsubstantiated escalation and that Russia doesn’t threaten anyone. At the same time, he didn’t rule out provocations to corroborate these Western statements and warned that the use of force to resolve the crisis in southeastern Ukraine will have serious consequences.

Lavrov reflects upon Russia-NATO relations

Brussels 27.12.2021 Anna van Densky There is no way that Russia joins NATO, since the West does not want to have rivals comparable in influence at the global stage, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told the Solovyov Live YouTube channel on Monday,December 27. (Image: illustration).

Reflecting the question about the possibility of joining NATO on certain conditions, on an equal footing, the diplomat said that he did not assume such an opportunity for Russian Federation.

“I do not consider this possible, as the whole process does not revolve around NATO or the EU, it is about the West’s unwillingness to have any competitors in the international arena that are in the slightest degree comparable in terms of influence,” Lavrov explained.

According to the Minister, such attitude of the Western states derives their “hysteria over the rise of China”, which agreed to the rule introduced in the global economy and “outplayed the West on its own field”.

Russian diplomat warns NATO against “delusions”

Brussels 28.11.2021 The assumptions heard in the United States that Russia is likely to be frightened with NATO capabilities in Ukraine and the Black Sea are dangerous delusions, Russia’s Ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov said on the YouTube channel during a TV show on Saturday, November 28.

“NATO states are taking over the Black Sea, Ukrainian territory. There are assumptions, which are voiced here, that certain daredevils or a group of combatants may turn up in Ukraine, who will try to test the strength of Russian defenses, expecting that we will not respond fearing the NATO potential. I would like to say and emphasize unequivocally that it is a very dangerous delusion,” the diplomat said.

Antonov pointed out that Washington is increasingly expanding the range of weapons delivered to Ukraine.

“Militarily speaking, this range of weapons funneled to Ukraine is expanding more and more. The Stinger [man-portable air-defense systems], Javelin [anti-tank weapons] and even our Mi-17 [helicopters] got there,” he said.

“They keep saying that these are defensive weapons. But we know what ‘defensive weapons’ mean, what the US Mk-41 systems are like, which, on the one hand, are certainly defensive, as they are anti-missile systems, but it has already been proven, and the Americans are not concealing now that they can be used for launching intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles,” the diplomat stressed.

Russia response to NATO Black Sea drills

Brussels 13.11.2021 President Vladimir Putin finds it inappropriate to carry out its drills in the Black Sea in response to NATO exercises there, there is no need to escalate the situation, he explained it in an interview with Pavel Zarubin.

“I should say that our Defense Ministry also came up with a proposal to hold its own unplanned exercises in this water area, but I believe that this is inappropriate and there is no need to further escalate the situation there. Therefore, the Russian Defense Ministry does not go further than escorting aircraft and ships,” Putin said.

The President drew attention to the fact that now the United States and its NATO allies are now conducting unplanned exercises in the Black Sea.

Moreover, “not only they formed a fairly powerful naval group there, but they also use aviation, including strategic aviation, in the course of these exercises,” Putin noted.

EU «wahsed hands» of Belarus

#Belarus #Lukahsenko #BelarusProtests
Anna van Densky OPINION Today, on August 19, an extraordinary meeting of the Council of the EU on the situation in Belarus took place by teleconferencing.

The feeble answer has surprised many. The EU leaders have not pronounced the name of the genuine elections winner Svetlana Tikhanovskaya even once (!)While being so ardent about Ukraine integration into the bloc, why showing so little engagement towards dramatic events in Belarus?

First of all the context has entirely changed for the Europenan Union as an internationl organisation, transcending a profound systemic crisis itself. The bloc is in a difficult economic and financial situation because of the pandemic and because of the Brexit. The UK, the second largest contributor to the EU’s coffers, has left the organization and there is no trade agreement yet, and most likely will be none, which will create a considerable number of the economic problems in short, medium and long term.

At present the economy of Belarus is integrated into Russian and it is also orientated to the former Republics of the USSR, exporting there machinery. What is especially lucrative is the export of agricultural products to Russia, while it would be not easy to find the replacement for clients at the EU market, which has a surplus of agricultural products to an extend that the farmers receive funds not to produce, and not to develop the arable lands.

The dependency of Belarus on Russian hydrocarbons (Yamal gaz pipline) is a common place, and does not need any additional clarifications; the machinery, produced for former Republics either.

Regarding political transition to democracy from Lukashenko authoritarian rule, the major riddle is how to integrate the country into the EU politically, while it’s economic foundation is firmly intertwined with Russian Federation, and former Soviet bloc.

The defence issue is not less problematic: joining the CSTO, Belarus became a military ally of Russia. Certainly it can cancel the CSTO membership, but the maximum of what can be achieved afterwards from the army and the people is military neutrality. Due to its history, the country will opt for neutrality policy, since the people do not sympathise with NATO and, unlike Ukraine and Georgia, there has never been any talk of joining the North Atlantic Alliance for Belarus.

And here the geopolitical level of the issue is reached: there is no point in integrating a country into the EU which will not host military bases of the United States, and even less so joining the the North Atlantic Alliance. If the Belarussians keep Lukashenko in disdain, it does not mean that they are ready to join the “belt of infidelity” and serve Western interest, regarding Russia as a foe, as Ukrainians and Georgians are eagerly doing.

Taking into consideration mentioned above one should not expect active political support and financial assistance to Belarus from the EU similar the one they offer to Ukraine and Georgia.

A policy of sanctions against Lukashenko’s entourage has already been chosen by the EU, which is related to the policy of sanctions againstRussia and will be further harmonized with it. De facto, what looks like support to Belarussians will be an additional package of sanctions against Russian economy.

Subsequently further retention of Lukashenko in power by allies in Moscow is not only meaningless, but frankly detrimental to the economic interests of Russia, because they will be used by the West as a tool for expanding sanctions. Lukashenko life-long presidency will also significantly deteriorate image of Vladimir Putin in domestic politics, and deepening of the Belarussian crisis will have a negative impact on the entire range of Russian interests at home and abroad.

In their best interest Russians shouldn’t hold on to the political corpse of Lukashenko, but should arrange his swift and humble funeral and turn their attention to the other contemporary political players preferred by Belarus people:

The king is dead! Long live the king!”.

Inauguration of incumbent President Lukashenko one more time will take place in two month, Russian TASS new agency reported. He has been Belarus authoritarian ruler for 26 years, who came to power as a “new type of leader” in last millenium and stayed due to his “clinch” with power for almost three decades, erasing smallest signs of dissent.

EU Enlargement or “perpetuum mobile” curse

The sound of the UK clacking the door has been still in the ears, when the EU re-launched the process of accession for Albania and Northern Macedonia, bending the rules under label of “new methodology“, creating a fast track for Western Balkan countries, making the membership possible just in six years.

With this new approach the EU firmly abandoned Copenhagen criteria (1993), as q compass, replacing it by fast-track “simplified” enlargement rules – absolute triumph of political volunatirsm & geopolitics. Inclusion of Western Balkans into block is the ultimate goal, to be achieved by bending rules accordingly.

The EU new “methodology” for #Enlargement will open fast track for accession of Western Balkans. In practical terms “cluster system” means whole process can take as little as six years, the Members of the European Parliament concluded, while discussing the issue with Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi (pictured).

The new EU Enlargement policy proposes two tracks: fast-track for desirable candidates as Albania & Northern Macedonia, and continuation of old-style rules for those for those who are already in process, like Turkey. However it is not a bitter irony of double standards, but geopolitical thinking in action!

Just in five days after Brexit, the EU felt sufficient absorption capacity” to accelerate the accession process of the Western Balkan countries, namely Albania and Northern Macedonia in first ranks. In the enlargement enthusiasm the EU has already allocated €28M and €50M to the counties, ignoring the systemic economic and social problems, caused by endemic corruption and criminality.

The fast-track accession procedure to Albania dabbed as “Colombia of Europe“, the pariah, notorious for organised crime, considered world top heroin “narco-state”, successfully operating also in cocaine and cannabis traffic, represents a serious existential threat to the EU in different areas. The experts say that yearly the Albanian and Italian costal guard intercept from 5% to 10% of the huge drugs flows, allowing to receive sufficient profit to mafia to maintain their European networks. But not only, because the wealth translates into party financing and accessing political power, and not least the erosion of the judiciary, nourishing corruption at the highest levels.

Praising Northern Macedonia for changing the name after decades of pressure from Athens, the perspective of six years EU accession talks looks like an indulgence for all mortal sins in one.

Transparency International warns about degrading situation in Northern Macedonia with overall corruption, including political “manifested through instances of abuse of power, conflict of interest and dubious practices of financing political parties and election campaigns is widespread, while political interference in all spheres of governance seriously hampers the implementation of anti-corruption reforms”.

Poor score indicating to the general toxic climate of deviation from democratic norms and standards by no means explains the bubbly enthusiasm of Commissioner
Oliver Varhelyi towards both countries accession to the familiy of the European democracies.

The are two major reasons for this phenomena, difficult for understanding from the common sense point of view.

First of all it is an emotional reaction to the UK departure, causing the EU apparatchiks energetic attempts to create an illusion of attractiveness of the bloc, and subsequently falling into trap of undiscriminating. An obsession with dynamics, a trompe d’œil of perpetum mobile of the European project, the idea of movement as proof of live and even vivacity.

The other aspect of this move is the genuine belief of the EU mandarines in their healing powers, bestowing progress and civility upon humanity. This particular belief, as any other is unjustified irrational sentiment, has been transferring the idea of European project into a modern cult. As any cult it requires ardeur of conviction, often denying the realities of physical world around: Greece has not completed land register since joining the EU in 1981 (!), and continues to avoid it in spite of Troika ultimatums during debt crisis in 2015. A little illustration of the huge discrepancy between EU imaginary powers of transformation, and valid capacities. However Greek experience did not discourage EU bureaucracy to roll red carpet for Albania, the second and the only country outside the EU in Europe without the land register.

The other level for Albania & Northern Macedonia accession is explained by geopolitics: and here the EU has to bow to the United States, as the major provider for defence of European continent under NATO umbrella. The clear trend of imposing maximum Alliance members onto the European bloc perfectly serves the American long term interest to prevent development of Common European defence, (once upon a time derailed by French National Assembly, but experiencing resurrection under President Macron). Flooding the EU with NATO allies will prevent Europe from growing muscle, constructing its own independent from the USA defence system. From that point of view inclusion of ensemble of Balkan allies, will secure NATO’s monopoly for the future in a completely democratic way – by voting in the European Council – the “legalised abortion” of European defence. Trojan Horses of the European project.

Libyan war crimes and punishment

Anna van Densky OPINION Curiously the European diplomacy started to talk about “war crimes” in Libya in the context of the protracted for a decade conflict ravaging after the West destruction of led by Colonel Gaddafi Libyan state. (Image above: Tuareg, Fezzan)

The failed ‘regime change’ opened a decade of chaos, and fragmentation, resulting in losses of among the civilian population along with the military. However the EU diplomats are not willing to remember who caused the current dramatic situation, neither they are prepared to demand the investigation of the assassination of Mouammar Gaddafi, whose lynching ended the period of the peaceful development of Libya.

Gaddafi killing

“The death of Mouammar Gaddafi, on October 20 in Syrtie, is one of the questions, which should be clarified. There are serious suspicions that it factually was the war crime“, said Luis Moreno-Campo, the General prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (The Hague) on December 16, a month after NATO manhunt, ending in Gaddafi death. Today, almost a decade later, Gaddafi lynching remains unpunished, the 150 tons of Libyan gold vanished and the Libyan state, bombed by NATO air forces, is still in ruins, ravaged by competing militias. The Murzuq air strike is no exception.

The air strike has been reported to be an action upon requests of local people of Murzuq, suffering from Chadian gangs:

The Libyan armed forces’ aviation, under the aegis of Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, responded promptly to requests for help from the Murzuq community in southern Libya. The village, on the southern outskirts of the capital in Fezzan, had been overtaken by a group of Chadian rebels who killed at least 20 people on Sunday morning. Residents spoke of members belonging to the Chadian opposition and Tebu, defined as “mercenaries in the pay of the Government of National Agreement“, based in Tripoli. The aviation has achieved a high precision raid that has dismantled the group and its means”, an Italian journalist Vanessa Tomassini reported from Libya.

Degraded to conflict and poverty by NATO bombs, the richest state of Maghreb  now faces the EU tutorials on human rights. The EU threatens with the lawsuits: the acts of “selective justice” vis-à-vis Libyans, while the names of the mega villains, who committed crimes resulting in Libyan tragedy, has been never mentioned.

If the EU top diplomat Mogherini stated on behalf of the EU on 2 August, thosecommitting war crimes and those breaching International Humanitarian Law must be brought to justice and held to account”, the investigation into Gaddafi assassination should be the first. Naturally the international community should protect the International Criminal Court, threatened by the US top officials: