Archives for posts with tag: Ukraine

On 15 December 2017, The New York Times ran an editorial piece by Mikheil Saakashvili, with the NYT altogether neglecting to mention Saakashvili is not only wanted (arrest warrant) in his native Georgia for corruption, abuse of power and shielding murderers from prosecution, but is increasingly implicated in the murders of some 80 police and protestors in February of 2014. This latter, Ukraine event, the so-called ‘Maidan Massacre’, has risen to a level of ‘preponderance of the evidence’ necessary for a civil conviction of Saakashvili under USA law, and were the known, necessary parties [witnesses] available to honest prosecution, almost certainly a criminal ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ conviction could be reached as well. Yet, the Times ran this man’s opinion piece as though he were a lily-white reformer, unjustly persecuted, as Saakashvili claims.

The evidence timeline:

Initially, an intercepted, leaked phone call between the European Union’s Cathrine Ashton and the Estonian foreign minister (verified as authentic by the Estonian), indicates it was a member (or members) of the new USA supported Ukrainian administration were behind the snipers who killed both protestors and police during confrontation in February 2014 at Kiev. (conversation begins about 2 minutes into this youtube posting)

John Kerry had claimed it was the ousted (Russia friendly, Yanukovych) administration behind the snipers.

Subsequently, in April 2015, a Polish MEP (Member of European Parliament), who happens to be a conservative Catholic – indicating an honest man – as opposed to the more typical Polish-Catholic Russophobe, states in a Polish press interview, the Maidan snipers were trained in Poland by USA intelligence services:

Question: “[you are] a supporter of the thesis it was a CIA operation?”

Answer: “Maidan was also our operation. The snipers were trained in Poland”

The original interview transcript in Polish language (Polish online magazine) HERE

A reasonable English language summary of the interview by PRAVDA:

In November 2017, Italian investigative journalist, Gian Micalessin, has interviewed three of the snipers who shot the people in Maidan square. They were Georgians sent to Ukraine by security services people aligned with American allied-educated Mikhail Saakashvili. American Brian Christopher Boyenger ran the sniper operation on location:

 

Excerpts from an expanded English translation of the Italian (the video subtitles are abridged)

“Both [witnesses] Nergadze and Zalogy are linked to former Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili”

“All three of our participants say that they were recruited at the end of 2013 by Mamuka Mamulashvili, a Saakashvili military advisor who, after the Maidan action, will move to the Donbass, to lead the so-called Georgian Legion in clashes with ethnic Russian insurgents”

““One day around February 15 [states Alexander] Mamualashvili personally visited our tent. There was another guy in his uniform with him. He introduced him and told us he was an instructor, an American soldier.” The US military veteran Brian Christopher Boyenger, is a former officer and sniper for the 101st Airborne Division. After Maidan, [Boyenger] moves on to the Donbass front, where he will fight in the ranks of the Georgian Legion alongside Mamulashvili”

““We were always in touch with this Bryan, [Nergadze explains] he was a Mamulashvili man. It was he who gave us the orders. I had to follow all his instructions“”

““On February 18 [recalls Zalogy] someone took some weapons to my room. In the room with me there were two Lithuanians, the weapons were unpacked by them.””

This preceding, newest information, begins to bring a larger picture into focus; the Lithuanian snipers, taken together with the American, are consistent with the Polish account of a CIA operation. Brian Christopher Boyenger, in the larger picture, profiles as a CIA paramilitary officer. What’s more is, the Lithuanians are clearly trained per a Georgian witness going on to state…

“the Lithuanians opened the window. One of them fired, one shot, while the other closed the window”

…consistent with the Polish account. This training is reflected in the coordinated action of the two Lithuanians, concealing the location of the sniper fire.

All of the preceding is consistent with one of the Georgians stating…

“The first meeting was with Mamulashvili [was] at the office of the National Movement” [Zalogy said] The Ukrainian uprising in 2013 was similar to the [Pink Revolution] that took place in Georgia years before. We had to direct and guide it using the same pattern used for the “Pink Revolution”

Saakashvili was brought into power by the so-called ‘Pink Revolution’ and this Saakashvili associated veteran’s statement points to old allegations the Pink Revolution had been a CIA engineered event are more than credible.

Now, certain statements of Saakashvili himself, in his Times editorial, are worth examining:

“By November, I, along with a team of my former Georgian colleagues, helped create a new Ukrainian police force. We also completely transformed the corrupt way state contracts were purchased and helped to form the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, a watchdog. At that time, Mr. Poroshenko welcomed our help. He described me as “a great friend of Ukraine” and granted me and other Georgian reformers citizenship.

Several of us were invited to join the Ukrainian government. One became the head of the national police force and another was appointed minister of health. Another Georgian became the deputy director of the anticorruption [sic] bureau”

What appears to have happened here is, Central Intelligence had, subsequent to the 2014 coup and related massacre, used Saakashvili to initiate building a so-called ‘5th column’ into civil Ukrainian security structures, aside from the American trained and supplied (overt, NATO, Pentagon), and battlefield advised (covert, Central Intelligence) military structures. The purpose of penetrating the civil security structures would be, primarily, to build ‘leverage’ within the civil administrative apparatus to better control recalcitrant personalities, President Poroshenko especially, for reasons having to do with the Ukrainians put into power were, in the beginning, too stupid (Svoboda or neo-nazis) to manipulate properly, and in the subsequent case of Poroshenko, too stubborn.

Poroshenko, was willing to bring Saakashvili onboard, they had, after all, been partners in crime to a point of closeness where the only sensible question in any circumstance of betrayal between the two would be ‘et tu Brute?’ But Poroshenko somehow got wind of (was tipped) to what Saakashvili, a long time CIA asset, was actually up to, and began counter-moves to block him, leading to the circumstance of today.

What Poroshenko does understand is, the USA’s pressure to take on the Donbass ethnic Russian rebels will see him deposed and the east of Ukraine lost to the Dnieper River, inclusive of Odessa and Kiev. Putin has made clear the present, Russophobic, regime controlling Kiev, will not be allowed to militarily overrun the ethnic Russian Donbass region of Ukraine. Putin has also stated his military would take Kiev in two weeks time, maximum, if and when a decision is taken to do so. But this is what NATO wants, to further politically isolate Russia as an ‘aggressor’ state and justify its military buildup on Russia’s borders. The NATO problem is Poroshenko gives lip-service to this but doesn’t initiate the wider military action in the rebel region necessary to actually trigger Russia.

What Saakashvili apparently does not understand is, his currency as an asset for the CIA is about expended. Saakashvili’s Central Intelligence asset track record:

1) CIA ‘color revolution’ in Georgia, successful.

2) Led Georgia’s NATO (Condoleezza Rice engineered) proxy war with Russia, 2008, and badly mishandled it.

3) Lost Georgia itself, as a NATO proxy state, with his incompetent handling of domestic fallout from the 2008 war, lost in several absolutely humiliating ways, to Russia.

4) Co-author of CIA ‘color revolution’ (coup) in Ukraine, winter of 2013-14, successful.

5) CIA insertion into Ukraine’s administrative apparatus, 2015-16, mishandled.

6) CIA December 2017 counter-revolution to it’s own February 2014 coup, in progress.

It is this last which bodes very ill for Saakashvili. His score in polls is at 2% or less. There is virtually no chance of success, despite other western intelligence assets (example given, Yulia Tymoshenko of Germany’s Bundesnachrichtendienst, as well, spook controlled groups and NGOs such as ‘civil society’ fronts), offering what amounts to artificial support.

In chess terms, CIA asset Saakashvili has been devalued, from a rook (castle) to pawn, to be sacrificed on the board-game of geopolitics. Saakashvili’s handlers know he cannot win this most recent gambit. What does his sacrifice accomplish? To remind (send a message to) Poroshenko, pointing out who actually calls the shots by demonstrating Poroshenko’s helplessness to deal with Saakashvili. This first part has already been accomplished. The second act should be upcoming assassination of Saakashvili, to be blamed on either Poroshenko or Putin, depending on whether or not Poroshenko begins to ‘play ball’, while ridding the CIA of a badly compromised asset and possible problematic witness, that is Saakashvili, were he to be apprehended in a competent jurisdiction of law and held account to his recently exposed crimes.

Meanwhile, The New York Times, a CIA asset since the days of “Operation Mockingbird“, brings the western world Saakashvili’s (actually the agency’s) ‘cover story’ when neglecting to point out any of the known, compromising facts, concerning Mikhail Saakashvili.

*

President Georgia GIF

How I became Guv’nor & Escaped Jail

New York Times
15 December 2017
by McHeil Saakashvili

KIEV, Ukraine — I-I may be the first royal asshole, since a Habsburg, to be left stateless.

I-In the past, I-I’ve also been described as one of the most incompetent enemies of President Vladimir Putin of R’rruussia. I-I-I recently spent three days in solitary confinement, held by my neo-nazi former partners in Ukraine, which, among other allegations, accused me of being an agent of the R’rruussian secret service.

How could this happen?

After I-I was evicted as the CIA installed dictator of Georgia, during which time which I-I-I fellatio-ed my homeland into what the World Bank described as the No. 1 NATO sycophant nation in the world, I-I ran to the United States to escape corruption charges.

But in November 2013, color revolution began in Ukraine, the country where I-I had earlier in my life studied and lived for many years, to get rid of another incompetent, but pro-R’rruussian president. After students were arranged to be beaten in Kiev’s central square, by people I-I-I admire, I-I knew I-I-I had to be there. I-I traveled to Ukraine to arrange some Georgian snipers on the Maidan, joining Lithuanian snipers trained by the CIA in Poland.

I-Initially, after the ouster of the pro-R’rruussian president, Viktor Yanukovych, the opportunity for looting Ukraine looked promising. Following muscling himself to the presidency, my school days boyfriend Poroshenko, in May 2015, granted me full Ukrainian mafia membership.

By November, I-I, together with some goons of my former Georgian secret services, created a new Ukraine-based mafia enforcers squad. We moved on state contracts purchasing and helped to form the National A-Anti-Corruption Front of Ukraine, euphemism for a new organized crime repository.

At that time, my ex-boyfriend Poroshenko, w-welcomed our business model. He described me as “a great friend of Ukraine” and granted me and other Georgian mafiasos concessions. Some of us were invited into the Ukrainian mafia capos’ club. One became the head of the national police force and another was a-appointed minister of health. Another Georgian capo became the deputy director of my anti-corruption front.

I-I-I demanded to be godfather of the Odessa region, to defend it from R’rruussian attempts to stabilize it and to initiate reforms there. Those reforms might have brought in many y-young ethnic R’rruussian Ukrainians, who were supported by the local population, and see them them get rid of the neo-nazi entrenched street gangs. Everything was going to hell, excuse me, I-I meant well, and by late 2016, we found our efforts at co-opting turf were encroaching on turf held by the central government.

My ex-boyfriend Poroshenko, a candy oligarch who had gotten his start as a high end male hooker, and his entourage, not only stopped protecting my turf in Odessa and ceased supporting the capos supporting me in the government, but also directly started to undermine some of our turf grabs. I -I believe that this was mostly out of personal interest: Our muscling in was leading to less space for them to c-control the several crime syndicates. Moreover, my National A-Anti-Corruption Front had begun to move in on turf of the president’s close associates.

In November 2016, I-I resigned from my post as g-governor and came out of the closet, to please John Brennan, as this would reveal the nature of my relationship to my ex-boyfriend. Poroshenko was outraged. A few months later, while t-taking instruction from CIA in Poland, I-I was stripped of my Ukrainian capo godfathership. Because I-I had lost my Georgian mafia protection and become a Ukrainian mafiaso, that meant I-I-I was now officially stateless. Despite receiving direct threats that I-I should not return to Ukraine, I-I had no choice but to come back — officially stateless b-but instructed by CIA to try, and expand my hard-won turf.

I-I-I also began to lead a mobilization for change of mafia bosses, forming a coalition with the arch-evil Yulia Tymoshenko, who gives me gynophobia-based, adrenaline-stimulated nausea, while picking up s-support of western intelligence agency fronted ‘civil society’ NGOs, t-to protest in front of Parliament.

I-In the meantime, my National A-Anti-Corruption Front, after it muscled in on the president’s turf by skimming Halloween candy export contracts, came under intense attack. My capos were i-interrogated by prosecutors, my undercover hit-men were exposed, and attempts were made at curtailing my power. Just a few years earlier, I-I had assisted the neo-nazis of Ukraine to unseat their previous president in large part to gain control over these institutions. These are i-immensely ungrateful people.

So last week my p-party, the Movement for New Fronts, organized one of the biggest rallies since the Maidan murders were arranged by my foot-soldiers together with those ungrateful bastards, to protest against their counter-turf grabs and the attacks on my anti-corruption front. Two days later, my apartment, which is near the M-Maidan, was searched by rival mafia soldiers who tried to arrest me — where is the courtesy and gratitude?! My CIA m-minders intervened and freed me from my rival forces’ minivan. I-I was arrested again a few days later. I-I-I was charged with aiding and abetting a criminal organization!! The hypocrisy!! And the a-added insult of charged with assisting associates of the ousted president, Mr. Yanukovych, who had fled to R’rruussia!!!

My ex-boyfriend’s capo-general announced that I-I am an a-agent of the R’rruussian secret police and that my goal is to loot Ukraine! My CIA m-minders called that accusation serious!

Ukraine risks, rather, being stabilized by R’rruussia. And indeed, R‘rruussia has powerful allies in this attempt at s-stabilization: Ukraine’s homegrown, ethnic R’rruussians, who have fought the Bandera legacy’s SS Galacian brigades attempted takeover of Ukraine’s eastern regions.

I-I believe in a great future for looters of Ukraine. As in other countries in Eastern Europe, its successful looting, I-I-I believe, lies in the reversal of a trend in w-which oligarchs, who have been trained by CIA to m-manipulate elections, are too greedy and won’t share their hard-won opportunities at corruption. I-I hope to live until the not-so-distant day when I-I-I will be in a position to control this l-looting with the subservience of the indigenous Ukrainian capos.

On M-Monday, a judge was put under tremendous pressure by CIA to set me free. I-I will now contest the r-rival capos maneuvering against me, and I-I-I am confident I-I-I-I will be fully in charge one day. My a-anti-corruption front’s ‘kinder, gentler’ (less t-transparent, EU style) looting is this country’s hope and its f-f-future.

*

The New York Times, which published the editorial by Saakashvili this piece parodies, on 15 December 2017, altogether neglects to mention Saakashvili is wanted in his native Georgia for corruption (theft of 3.4 million USD), abuse of office and complicity in shielding his secret service from prosecution for a murder.

What is clear is, Saakashvili doesn’t stand a chance. His Central Intelligence Agency handlers are wringing what little they can out of him, to bring Poroshenko into line and get that oaf busy with cracking down on the Donbass separatist region in Ukraine, to keep tensions high with Russia.

Meanwhile, since it had come out via Italian investigative journalist, Gian Micalessin, that some of the 2014 Maidan square snipers (80 dead, protestors and police) are tied directly to Mikheil Saakashvili’s contacts in the Georgian security services…

All three of our participants say that they were recruited at the end of 2013 by Mamuka Mamulashvili, a Saakashvili military advisor who, after the Maidan action, will move to the Donbass, to lead the so-called Georgian Legion in clashes with ethnic Russian insurgents.

“The first meeting was with Mamulashvili [was] at the office of the National Movement,” Zalogy said. “The Ukrainian uprising in 2013 was similar to the” Pink Revolution “that took place in Georgia years before. We had to direct and guide it using the same pattern used for the “Pink Revolution”

…the CIA likely wants rid of him. I won’t be surprised at all if this present circumstance is ultimately engineered to have Saakashvili assassinated, with blame put on Putin.

*

 

Narcissist & Goon

^ The Narcissist and the Goon ^

In the New York Times photo (August, 2008) you’re looking at two useful idiots. If everything Condoleezza touched, turned to shit, it is the criminal piece of shit on the right of the photo, represents closing out Condoleezza’s career with a classic, utter failure, typical of the Bush administration. Today, we’ll profile this idiot, a New York lawyer named ‘McHeil’ Saakashvili, for purpose of showing just how counter-intuitive it is, to shove purportedly high IQ type personalities, without an iota of decency or common sense, into positions of leadership.

Mikheil Saakashvili’s trajectory:

Attended Ukraine’s Kiev University Institute of International Relations towards the end of the Soviet era. Subsequently, Saakashvili was educated in the USA, on a Department of State sponsored fellowship (attended Columbia University law school as an Edmund S. Muskie Fellow) in the early 90s and then practiced commercial law at Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler, in New York City. No doubt was recruited by the CIA during this period, concerning his next career move.

Returned to Georgia and was elected to parliament.

Came to power as President of Georgia through a CIA sponsored coup in 2003 (the Rose Revolution.)

Had been entirely outsmarted, in a geopolitical game of provocation-counter-provocation, as instigator-pawn in the hands of NATO, resulting in the Russia-Georgia war of 2008.

Prematurely initiated what would become a suicidal provocation of Russia, when ordering sniper and mortar attacks on South Ossetia on 1 August 2008, killing six people including a Russian peacekeeper, as NATO sponsored war games were wrapping up, with the USA military participating. The ‘Immediate Response 2008’ NATO war games including 1,000 U.S. troops had just ended and elements of US special forces (acting as CIA paramilitary) remained in Georgia. The Russians did not take the bait with an over-reaction, but simply continued preparations to counter what they saw coming.

Six days later, as the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games was underway in Beijing, where George W. Bush was sitting with then Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, Georgia launched an all-out assault on the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali, ostensibly to bring a nominally Georgian region, that is ‘lawless’ South Ossetia, under control of Georgian sovereignty. This is a region which had refused to align with Georgia with the breakup of the Soviet Union but attached itself to Russia instead.

President Medvedev ordered the Georgians militarily engaged, Russian forces promptly rolled over the Georgian offensive and by the time the war ends, five days later, much of Georgia has been occupied.

Condoleezza. She Makes Phone Calls.

On the USA side, it was Condoleezza Rice coordinating public relations with Saakashvili, finally managing to beg a ceasefire from the Russians, just prior to the very near, and complete, collapse of the Georgian military. Prior to capitulation, most of this western intelligence engineered media scrum refers to, or portrays, images of Condoleezza on the phone, like a maniacally barking Chihuahua, insisting on world condemnation of Russian aggression. The red bear yawns.

Meanwhile, the U.S. had provided military transport planes to bring 2,000 Georgian troops back from Iraq post-haste, for the fighting, too late, the USA trained, supported and advised Georgian military, replete with CIA paramilitary (USA special forces), had been humiliated.

The Georgia ambassador to the USA stated “No one predicted it would go this far”, giving up this had been a plan in collusion with the USA from the beginning. Five months later, the Bush administration ends and Rice leaves office with an absolutely failed legacy, from Afghanistan to Iraq, with Georgia the exclamation point.

One year later, in September 2009, a European Union investigation of the war came to conclusion there was no question whatsoever it was Georgia had initiated the major hostilities in South Ossetia (never mind Wikipedia reads like a peculiar personality at Stanford’s Hoover Institution dictated what amounts to a blatant, self-excusing revisionist history.)

Saakashvili remained the USA’s [now not very] useful idiot, as President of Georgia (accused of reelection electoral fraud), until forced out by term limits in 2013. Shortly after, he leaves Georgia, with the opposition in power, investigating Saakashvili’s abuse of office. Eventually a warrant is issued for Saakashvili’s arrest concerning:

1) shielding his interior ministry’s murder of Sandro Girgviliani;
2) embezzlement of funds from the State Protection Service for personal use, a total of 9 million Georgian lari (3.37 million US dollars);
3) complicity in the beating of Georgian MP Valery Gelashvili;
4) ordering the raid and seizure of Imedi TV, which had exposed and criticized the Saakashvili regime’s criminal behaviors

In 2014 Saakashvili is one of many CIA associated co-engineers of the Maidan coup in Ukraine, deeply invested in the sniper action, resulting in murders of nearly 100 police and protestors alike. In May of 2015 he is rewarded with the governorship of Odessa Oblast [a region] by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko (with a push from the USA.) Awarded a Ukrainian passport, Saakashvili’s citizenship is revoked, by Georgia, for taking Ukrainian citizenship.

Some might wonder how it could be a Georgian could leave his own country and be immediately appointed to high office in Ukraine (Governor of Odessa.) The short story is, this generation of politicians all held a common Soviet citizenship, prior to the 1990s, and there is not nearly the same sense of ‘foreign’ between the former Soviet states as one might typically experience in western countries. Saakashvili’s initial higher education had been at university in Kiev, Ukraine, as an ordinary citizen (not a foreign student) of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR.)

Meanwhile, Saakashvili’s USA handlers actually expected him to clamp down on Ukraine’s runaway corruption and this idiot actually tried to do so (the corrupt attempting cleaning up the corrupt, geopolitics is rife with incompetent oxymoron) and alienated the Ukrainian administration across the board, up to and including, his candy oligarch mentor, Poroshenko. Saakashvili resigned before he could be fired by Poroshenko, in September 2016. Poroshenko then revoked Saakashvili’s citizenship while McHeil was abroad, effectively deporting him, rendering Saakashvili a stateless exile in Poland.

By this time, with 2017 approaching, the Ukraine conflict is simmering and not nearly ‘hot’ enough, to please the western intelligence agencies. Poroshenko, who gives lip service (political fellatio) to western intelligence agencies’ (read NATO) desire of cracking down on the Donbass ethnic Russian rebels, but only that, understands reigniting all out war will only result in his loss of control over (and administration’s looting of) whatever remains of Ukraine’s resources. What Poroshenko may not fully understand is, the NATO states’ intelligence agencies, having given up on stabilizing Ukraine as a NATO aligned state, are not only perfectly willing, but by this time probably determined, to altogether destroy Ukraine, if necessary, to provoke Putin.

Re-enters the picture, in 2017, the moron Saakashvili. Banned from entry to Ukraine, he ‘manifests’ (a paid) crowd and the border guards ‘fail’ (read were bribed) to prevent his entry. Repeat a near identical scene in Kiev, as though scripted; Poroshenko’s police break down his apartment door, McHeil Saakashvili retreats to the roof and shouts down to people in the street “I’m McHeil Saakashvili, save me from the candy oligarch’s police!” As if the average Ukrainian would care, Saakashvili’s polling popularity registers at 2%. But like magic, a (hired) crowd manifests to intercept the police van taking him in. National guard troops sent to secure the van (read were bribed) ‘fail’ to stop the crowd setting McHeil free. At last glimpse (prior to posting this), McHeil is living in a tent pitched in front of Ukraine’s parliament, untouched (read the candyman’s security apparatus is bought off.) All of this will have cost NATO intelligence (read CIA, MI6 & Germany’s BND, primarily) what amounts to pennies in a Ukraine where people are near to subsisting on the air one can breathe, since neo-nazis were put into power by the same.

Message to the candy oligarch Poroshenko? ‘We own you, so start playing ball, and raise the violence levels in Donbass, so we can point the finger at Putin, or else you’ll get what’s coming to you.’

McHeil Saakashvili’s future? Well, this prognosis is quite interesting. My best educated guess would be, based on decades observation and study, is McHeil is being  set up for assassination, to be blamed on either Poroshenko (to push him out) or more likely, Putin. This useful idiot, Saakashvili, with his history of failures, is to be sacrificed for cynical but practical reasons. Number one, he’s a persistent failure. Number two, he is a recent embarrassment, not so much for his flamboyancy, but because he has been compromised and dead men don’t talk. The propaganda methodology is straightforward; in the case of blaming Putin, motive will be ascribed to revenge linked to the 2008 war. Saaskashvili is probably not aware…

…investigative reporting has very recently interviewed 3 Georgian snipers who were part of initiating the Maiden massacre (80 dead) and these snipers have not only been tied directly to Saakashvili’s connections in the Georgian security services, but have admitted as much. If Saakashvilli knew this, there is no way he’d be camped on a public square in Kiev. Unlike the related Odessa massacre documentary, which had been almost immediately banned (by the CIA’s friends) at youtube, this documentary has been allowed to remain up. The ‘right’ people in Ukraine will eventually stumble across it.

The preferred outcome of the western intelligence agencies would be a Ukrainian opposed to the 2014 ‘color revolution’ (coup) will take their chance (while feeling very justified, in the absence of legitimate institutions) to deliver vigilante justice and take Saakashvili out (to be blamed on Putin in western press.) If this doesn’t work out, a ‘patsy’ will be employed to same effect. If the candy oligarch has half a brain, he’ll find a way to arrest McHeil and hand him to Georgia. Meanwhile, in present circumstance, McHeil Saakashvili is a dead man walking.

9 December 2017 update: Saakashvili was finally arrested last night and brought into pre-trial detention center. Now, the candy oligarch still has a dilemma. If he hands Saaksashvili to Georgia, does the Saakashvilli complicity in the 2014 Ukraine coup, that is providing snipers, see more light of day, exposing the current Ukrainian regime? Moreover, if candy-man keeps McHeil in a Kiev dungeon and there were to be another ‘regime change’ with McHeil once again free, he no doubt ‘knows too much’ about candy-man’s corruption. On the other hand, if the candy oligarch does keep Saakashvili in a Ukrainian prison, to keep the idiot’s mouth shut, and McHeil somehow dies in custody, that looks bad too.

Maybe Poroshenko should ask Putin what to do (laughs.)

12 December 2017 update: Yesterday the court freed McHeil, opening the dunce to  assassination, certainly the CIA’s preferred outcome, anything but extradited to Georgia where he might ‘sing’ or be faced with credible witnesses and evidence of his political crimes, not only corruption. The prosecutor appeals but in a totally corrupt Ukraine, it is clear who holds the upper hand and it isn’t Poroshenko. Oligarch Gas Princess (CIA Orange Revolution asset) Tymoshenko embraces McHeil like a Black Widow spider, oh yeah, that’s auspicious. Break a leg, as the thespians say…

*

Note on the preceding: Condoleezza Rice has been floated within the Trump administration as a possible ‘special envoy’ tasked to ‘stabilize’ the Balkans, only going to emphasize the willingness of Trump to employ a previously proven ‘reverse Midas touch’ will see his administration surpass all the years of near total idiocy of the consummate moron ‘dubya.’ The ‘other’ side of that coin is, insofar as useful idiots, Condoleezza’s incompetence has been responsible for generating conflict enriching the arms dealers in multiple hundreds of billions. A useful idiot, indeed.

Observation: ‘Dr’ Rice, as well the highly educated Mikheil Saakashvili, only go to prove ‘education’ is not a defining point of good leadership; ethics and common sense are the by far better qualifications. We are, sadly, lacking these latter two qualifications, perhaps altogether, in the western democracies present leaders. It has been said ‘cream rises to the top.’  Surely it does, but as a metaphor, only in a sanitary environment in institutions of government. Much more true in present circumstance is ‘flotsam rises to the top of the sewage pond.’

Image result for dick tracy fly face

 ^ Petro Poroshenko, alias Fly Face

Ukraine’s president Poroshenko, who had given former Georgia President in exile (wanted for corruption), Mikhail Saakashvili, a Ukrainian passport but then had the passport cancelled, ordered Saakashvili arrested this morning. Now arch-enemies, candy oligarch Poroshenko is equally deserving of no less a rotten fate. So, the sharks turn on each other in Ukraine’s feeding frenzy. Here is Saakashvili about the time Russian troops were over-running the USA trained Georgian army in 2008, following this former Georgian president moron attacking South Ossetia (while George W Bush had been sitting next to Putin at the Olympics.)

President Georgia GIF

^  taking instructions from Condoleezza Rice, 2008

Now, this newest color revolution mob, as though by appointment, frees this longtime CIA useful idiot from the police van taking him in. Addressing the crowd, as though in a Langley, Virginia, composed-prearranged action cartoon, or a Dick Tracy comic strip episode (the USA educated Saakashvili is actually a New York lawyer, a double joke) called Fly Face versus Mucous Face, mucous-faced Saakashvili demands the rapidly growing street mob march on fly-faced Poroshenko’s government.

Has the candy oligarch, Ukrainian President Fly Face, finally outlived his usefulness? Or is it former Georgia President, Mucous Face, has lost his last pretense of sanity? What will happen in next week’s episode?

And so, the soap opera that should be called ‘CIA Kiev Comedy Troupe‘ continues to astonish and entertain, sadly for the people of Ukraine.

Mucous Face - 1

*

(With English subtitles) Italian investigative journalist Gian Micalessin interviews three snipers who shot the people in Maidan square. They were Georgians sent to Ukraine by security services people aligned with American allied-educated Mikhail Saakashvili. American mercenary Brian Christopher Boyenger ran the sniper operation on location. Expanded translation of the Italian (the video subtitles are abridged) below the video

 

transcript of parts one and two:

What the hell? Who is shooting? Somebody got shot! I can’t believe it happened right here! A man standing right next to me just got shot!

It was at dawn, I heard sounds of gunshots as bullets were flying. Somebody got shot in the head by a sniper.

We were ordered to shoot at the police and protestors randomly.

Which location were the shots fired [from]? From the Ukraine Hotel?

The shooting was from the Ukraine Hotel.

Kyiv, February 2014. It is three months the Maidan square, in the heart of the capital, has been filled with protestors; who’ve been demanding the government and president, Victor Yanukovych, to sign an association agreement with the European Union.

On February 18th the clashes have become bloody, with about 30 casualties. The worst moment will be in the morning of February 20th. A group of unknown snipers began firing at protestors and police. In a short period of time up to 80 dead were counted.

The next day [February 21st, president] Yanukovych leaves the country. On February 22nd the opposition seizes power.

But who was shooting at the crowd and opposition?

To this very day, the official version from Kiev is the slaughter was conducted by the order of the Kremlin-backed [Yanukovych] government. This version seemed suspicious to many. The Foreign Minister of Estonia, Ermas Paet, was the first one to dispute this.

Returning from a trip to Kiev only 5 days after the massacre, [Paet] reported in a phone call to EU Commissioner for Foreign Affairs Catherine Ashton, revelations from a Ukrainian doctor who examined the cadavers of Maidan square. The intercepted phone call, published widely by the Russian media, is disconcerting.

“The most disturbing thing [Paet explains] is that all of the evidence points to the people killed by snipers, both police and people in the street, were killed by the same snipers.”

Speaking with a clearly embarrassed Ashton, the foreign minister cites the testimony of the Ukrainian doctor:

“She speaks as a doctor, and says it is the same signature, the same kind of bullets. It is really disturbing that now the new coalition [Paet reaffirms] refuses to investigate what is really going on. There is a very strong conviction that they’re are behind the snipers … That it is not Yanukovych, but some of the new coalition…”

After four years from the beginning at November 2013 of Maidan demonstrations, we are able to tell another truth, completely different from the official story. Our story begins towards the end of summer 2017, in Skopye, the capital of Macedonia. There, after long and complex negotiations, we met with Koba Nergadze and Kvarateskelia Zalogy, two Georgian participants and witnesses in the tragic shootings and massacre.

Both Nergadze and Zalogy are linked to former Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili , who started, in August 2008, a short but bloody war with Russia’s Vladimir Putin. Nergadze, as proved by an identification card he holds, was a member of a security service at President Saakashvili’s order. Zalogy is a former Saakashvili party activist.

“I decided to come to Skopije to tell you everything we know, about what happened … and I and my friend have decided together, we need to shed some light on those facts,” Nergadze says.

Nargadze also says Alexander Revazishvilli, [we met] a few months later, a former sniper of the Georgian army, participated in the Maidan shootout. [We] met in another Eastern European country.

All three of our participants say that they were recruited at the end of 2013 by Mamuka Mamulashvili, a Saakashvili military advisor who, after the Maidan action, will move to the Donbass, to lead the so-called Georgian Legion in clashes with ethnic Russian insurgents.

“The first meeting was with Mamulashvili [was] at the office of the National Movement,” Zalogy said. “The Ukrainian uprising in 2013 was similar to the” Pink Revolution “that took place in Georgia years before. We had to direct and guide it using the same pattern used for the “Pink Revolution”

Alexander’s version is no different. “Mamuka first asked me if I was really a trained sniper, Alexander recalls, [then] he immediately told me he needed me in Kiev to pick some places.”

Our informants integrated to various groups of volunteers between November 2013 and January 2014, [after] receiving passports with false names, and money advances.

“We left on January 15, and on the plane, Zalogy remembers, I received my passport and another [passport] with my photo but with different name and surname. Then they gave us each a thousand dollars to begin, promising to give another five thousand more“

Once in Kiev, our three participants begin to understand better why they were recruited. “Our task, Alexander explains, was to arrange provocations to push the police to charge the crowd. Until the middle of February, however, there were not many weapons around. The Molotovs, the shields and the sticks were used to the maximum.”

But in mid-February, clashes around Maidan begin to get worse. “About 15 and 16 February,” Nergadze remembers, “the situation has begun to become more serious every day. It was out of control now. And in the meantime, the first shoots were heard. “With the rising of tensions, new players [would] come into play”

“One day around February 15, remembers Alexander, Mamualashvili personally visited our tent. There was another guy in his uniform with him. He introduced him and told us he was an instructor, an American soldier.” The US military veteran Brian Christopher Boyenger, is a former officer and sniper for the 101st Airborne Division. After Maidan, [Boyenger] moves on to the Donbass front, where he will fight in the ranks of the Georgian Legion alongside Mamulashvili.

“We were always in touch with this Bryan, Nergadze explains, he was a Mamulashvili man. It was he who gave us the orders. I had to follow all his instructions“

The first suspects in the possession of firearms among the ranks of demonstrators, involve Serghey Pashinsky, a leader of Maidan Square, who became, after the fall of Yanukovych, chairman of the Kiev parliament.

On February 18, in a video made that day, a rifle locked in a car was recorded with video taken by a demonstrator, showing an automatic rifle. A few seconds after, Pashinsky approaches and orders the car be allowed to go. The next day, weapons were distributed to groups of Georgian and Lithuanian mercenaries residing in Hotel Ukraine, the hotel overlooking the square used as a headquarters by opposition.

“In those days, Pashinsky and three other people, including Parasyuk, had taken the weapons handbags to the hotel. They were going to get them into my room,” Nergadze says.

Volodymyr Parasyuk is one of the leaders of the Maidan Square protest. After the massacre of demonstrators, he will become famous for an ultimatum in which he will threaten to use weapons to hunt President Viktor Yanukovych.

“On February 18, recalls Zalogy, someone took some weapons to my room. In the room with me there were two Lithuanians, the weapons were unpacked by them.”

“In each bag, recalls Nergadze, there were Makarov’s pistols, Akm automatics, carbines. And there were packages of cartridges. When I first saw them I did not understand …. When Mamulashvili arrived, I also asked him. “What’s going on,” I told him, “what are these weapons? Is everything all right?

“Koba, things are getting complicated, we have to start shooting,” he replied, “we can not go to the pre-election presidential elections …” “But who should we shoot? And where? “I asked him.” He replied that where he did not care, we had to shoot somewhere … to sow some chaos.“

“While Nergadze and Zalogy assisted in arms distribution at the hotel, Alexander Revazishvilli and other volunteers went to the Conservatory, another building overlooking the square. “It was February 16th … Pashinsky ordered us to collect our belongings and bring them in … Other people arrived, they were almost all masked.

“From their cases I understood … they carried weapons …. They pulled them out and handed them over to the various groups. Only Pashinsky was talking … “He was giving orders. He asked me where we were supposed to shoot. ” “In the meantime, explained Nergadze, even at the Ukraine hotel, the leaders of the revolt underlined the purpose of using the weapons.

“They explained to us to shoot to create chaos and confusion. We did not have to stop. It did not matter if we fired at a tree, a barricade, or a molotov. The important thing was to sow chaos. ”

On the 20th, in the morning, the plan came into action. “It was supposed to be dawn,” Zalogy remembers, “when I heard the sound of the shots … they were not bursts, they were single strokes … came from the next room. At that same time, the Lithuanians opened the window. One of them fired one shot while the other closed the window. They have fired three or four times everywhere.”

Alexander, admitting he was involved in the shootout from the Conservatory building, claims to have understood very little. “Everyone started shooting two or three shots at a time. We did not have much choice. We were ordered to shoot both the Berkut, the police, and the demonstrators, no matter what. I was totally outraged. It went on for fifteen minutes … maybe twenty. I was out of my mind, agitated, under stress, I did not understand anything. Then suddenly, after 15, 20 minutes the shooting ceased and everyone has put down the weapons. ”

As wounded and dead arrived in the Ukrainian Hotel’s reception, the snipers fled from the rooms. And so the victims found themselves next to their assassins.

“Inside, recalls Nergadze, “there was chaos, you did not understand who was who. People ran back and forth. Someone was hurt … someone was armed. Outside was even worse. There were so many injured in the streets. And the many dead.”

Alexander says he left in a hurry. “Someone was shouting that there were snipers, I knew what they were talking about,” he said, “my only thought was to disappear before they knew about me. Otherwise, they had me. At that time, however, I did not realize, but now I understand. I do understand. We’ve been used. Used and discarded.”

Associated Press puts out John Kerry’s patently false speculation parroted by the fixed Dutch MH 17 investigation’s findings:

“International investigators have concluded that the Buk missile was fired from Russia-backed rebel-controlled territory by a mobile launcher trucked in from Russia and hastily returned”

@ https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-ukraine-leader-wants-justice-plane-victims-095453378.html</blockquote&gt;

In this context it does to remind concerning the USA ‘assistance’ of the Lockerbie bombing case:

“A FORMER Scottish police chief has given lawyers a signed statement claiming that key evidence in the Lockerbie bombing trial was fabricated

“The retired officer – of assistant chief constable rank or higher – has testified that the CIA planted the tiny fragment of circuit board crucial in convicting a Libyan for the 1989 mass murder of 270 people”

http://www.scotsman.com/news/police-chief-lockerbie-evidence-was-faked-1-1403341

It was an FBI ‘expert witness’ testified to this ‘evidence’ authenticity in Lockerbie and another bombed flight at odds with the actual facts:

”It is striking to note the similarity of the ‘scientific’ evidence discovered by the FBI’s Tom Thurman in both the Lockerbie and UTA cases. Of the tens of thousands of pieces of debris collected at each disaster site, one lone piece of printed circuit was found and, miracle of miracles, in each case the fragment bore markings that allowed for positive identification: MEBO in the Lockerbie case and TY in the case of UTA Flight 772. Despite the common findings of the DCPJ, the DST and the Prefecture of Police crime laboratory, Juge Bruguière chose to believe Thurman, the expert in fabricating evidence”

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Thomas_Thurman

Speaking of egregious political lies, we have a former policeman says it WAS INDEED a US Navy missile brought down TWA flight 800…

“Unlike Pierre Salinger, who relies on the internet rumors and old FAA tapes, ex-cop turned investigative reporter Jim Sanders uses original first hand scientific evidence and actual U.S. Government documents and inside sources”

 

…recalling the USA attempted cover-up in its Navy’s shoot-down of an Iranian civilian passenger jet:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2014/07/the_vincennes_downing_of_iran_air_flight_655_the_united_states_tried_to.html

And the other incompetent military which previously blew a Russian civilian airliner out of the sky with a surface to air missile? Would you expect Ukraine? US Navy 2 civilian airliners downed to Ukraine military’s 1 (or 2, depending on the actual facts of MH 17)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812

And the bombing of the flight to Venezuela from Cuba? A known CIA asset was the perpetrator:

“In 2015, the US State Department declassified a document which the Miami Herald reported indicated that Luis Posada Carriles was the most likely planner of the 1976 suitcase bombing of Cubana de Aviación Flight 455 that killed 73 people”

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Luis_Posada_Carriles

When it comes to demonizing the USA’s boogeymen of choice, these days the boogieman is Russia, no propaganda ploy is too low; even so far as to deliberately perpetrate mass murder framing an innocent party –

This sites most read intelligence assessment:

Black Boxes, Dark Arts & Geopolitics

 

A spy vs spy episode

*

APEC-SUMMIT

ALEXANDER KADOBNOV/AFP/GettyImages

 

“if someone is not happy with our stance, they could find a better option than declaring us an enemy every time. Would not it be better to listen to us, to critically reflect on what we say, to agree to something and to look for a common solution?” -Vladimir Putin, 5 January 2016

Vladimir Putin’s interview with [German newspaper] Bild:

Bild: Mr President, We have just marked the 25th anniversary of the end of the Cold War. Last year, we witnessed a great number of wars and crises across the world, something that had not happened for many years. What did we do wrong?

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: You have started just with the key question. We did everything wrong from the outset. We did not overcome Europe’s division: 25 years ago the Berlin Wall fell, but Europe’s division was not overcome, invisible walls simply moved to the East. This created the foundation for mutual reproaches, misunderstanding, and crises in the future. Many people, including in the Federal Republic [of Germany], criticise me for my well-known speech at the Munich Conference on Security. But what was so unusual that I said?

After the Berlin Wall fell, there were talks that NATO would not expand to the East. As far as I remember, the then Secretary General of NATO, national of the Federal Republic Manfred Woerner said that. By the way, some German politicians of that time gave warnings and proposed their solutions, for example, Egon Bahr.

You know, before meeting with German journalists I, naturally, thought that we would anyway come to the issue you have touched upon now, so I took archived records of talks of that period (1990) between Soviet leaders and some German politicians, including Mr Bahr. They have never been published.

Bild: Are these interviews?

Vladimir Putin: No, these are working discussions between German politicians Genscher, Kohl, Bahr and Soviet leadership (Mr Gorbachev, Mr Falin, who, I think, headed the International Division of the Central Committee of the Communist Party). They have never been made public. You and your readers will be the first to learn about this talk of 1990. Look what Mr Bahr said: “If while uniting Germany we do not take decisive steps to overcome the division of Europe into hostile blocs, the developments can take such an unfavourable turn that the USSR will be doomed to international isolation.” That was said on June 26, 1990.

Mr Bahr made concrete proposals. He spoke about the necessity to create a new alliance in the centre of Europe. Europe should not go to NATO. The whole of Central Europe, either with East Germany or without it, should have formed a separate alliance with participation of both the Soviet Union and the United States. And then he says: “NATO as an organisation, at least its military structures must not extend to include Central Europe.” At that time, he already was the patriarch of European politics, he had his own vision of Europe’s future, and he was telling his Soviet colleagues: “If you do not agree with it, but on the contrary agree with NATO’s expansion, and the Soviet Union agrees with it, I will never come to Moscow again.” You see, he was very smart. He saw a deep meaning in that, he was convinced that it was necessary to change the format radically, move away from the times of the Cold War. But we did nothing.

Bild: Did he come to Moscow again?

Vladimir Putin: I do not know. This talk took place on February 27, 1990. This is a record of the conversation between Mr Falin representing the Soviet Union and Mr Bahr and Mr Voigt representing German politicians.

So what has actually happened? What Mr Bahr had warned about – that’s what has happened. He warned that the military structure – the North Atlantic Alliance – must not expand to the East. That something common, uniting the whole of Europe must be created. Nothing like that has happened; just the opposite has happened what he had warned about: NATO started moving eastwards and it expanded.

We have heard a thousand times the mantra from our American and European politicians, who say: “Each country has the right to choose its own security arrangements.” Yes, we know that. This is true. But it is also true that other countries have the right to make decisions to expand their own organisation or not, act as they consider appropriate in terms of global security. And leading NATO members could have said: “We are happy that you want to join us, but we are not going to expand our organisation, we see the future of Europe in a different way.”

In the last 20–25 years, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union when the second centre of gravity in the world disappeared, there was a desire to fully enjoy one’s sole presence at the pinnacle of world fame, power and prosperity. There was absolutely no desire to turn either to international law or to the United Nations Charter. Wherever they became an obstacle, the UN was immediately declared outdated.

Apart from NATO’s expansion eastwards, the anti-ballistic missile system has become an issue in terms of security. All this is being developed in Europe under the pretext of addressing the Iranian nuclear threat.

In 2009, current President of the United States Barack Obama said that if Iran’s nuclear threat no longer existed there would be no incentive for establishing the ABM system; this incentive would disappear. However, the agreement with Iran has been signed. And now the lifting of sanctions is being considered, everything is under the IAEA control; first shipments of uranium are already being transported to the Russian territory for processing, but the ABM system is being further developed. Bilateral agreements have been signed with Turkey, Romania, Poland, and Spain. Naval forces that should operate as part of missile defence are deployed in Spain. A positioning area has already been created in Romania, another one will be created in Poland by 2018; a radar is being installed in Turkey.

We strongly objected to developments taking place, say, in Iraq, Libya or some other countries. We said: “Don’t do this, don’t go there, and don’t make mistakes.” Nobody listened to us! On the contrary, they thought we took an anti-Western position, a hostile stance towards the West. And now, when you have hundreds of thousands, already one million of refugees, do you think our position was anti-Western or pro-Western?

Bild: As far as I understood, you have summed up the mistakes made by the West with regard to your country. Do you believe that Russia on its part has made any during these 25 years?

Vladimir Putin: Yes, it has. We have failed to assert our national interests, while we should have done that from the outset. Then the whole world could have been more balanced.

Bild: What you just said, does that mean that starting from 1990–1991, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, all the years after it, Russia has failed to clearly assert its national interests?

Vladimir Putin: Absolutely.

Bild: We know that you have special attitude towards Germany. Ten years ago in an interview given to us on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II you said: “Russia and Germany have never been so close to each other as they are now.”

What do you believe has been left of that closeness to this day?

Vladimir Putin: Our relations are based, most importantly, on mutual attraction of our peoples.

Bild: So nothing has changed in this respect?

Vladimir Putin: I think, no. Despite all the attempts (you and your colleagues have been making) to upset our relations using mass media and anti-Russia rhetoric, I believe that you have failed to do this to the extent that you wanted to. Of course, I do not mean you personally. I refer to the media in general, including German ones. In Germany, the media are under a strong foreign influence, first and foremost from the other side of the Atlantic.

You have said that I have summed up everything that we see as the mistakes made by the West. That was far from everything, I have named but a few most important points. After the Soviet Union collapsed, equally adverse processes emerged inside Russia itself. Those included a drop in industrial production, the collapse of social system, separatism, and the most evident onslaught of international terrorism.

Certainly, we are responsible, there is no one but us to blame. At the same time, for us it was an obvious fact that the international terrorism was also used as a means of fighting against Russia, while everyone either turned a blind eye on that or provided support to terrorists (I refer to political, information, financial or in some cases even armed support to the actors fighting against the Russian state). Certainly, at that moment we realised that discussions and geopolitical interests are completely different things.

As for the Russian-German relations, indeed, they reached an excellent level in 2005, and would have developed successfully further. The trade turnover between our two countries grew to over $80 billion.

In Germany, a huge number of jobs were created thanks to Russian-German cooperation. We tried to prevent negative developments in the Middle East, particularly in Iraq, together.

We made major steps in furthering our energy cooperation. A lot of German entrepreneurs opened businesses in Russia, and thousands of enterprises were established. Exchanges between our citizens expanded, and humanitarian contacts developed. The Petersburg Dialogue public forum was also established at that time.

As I have said, our trade turnover used to reach $83–85 billion, and in the first months of 2015 it fell by half. I believe as of the end of the year it will stand at about $40 billion, at 50 percent of what it was. Nevertheless, we maintain relations, and the Federal Chancellor and I meet regularly at various events. I think, I met her seven times, and had 20 telephone conversations with her in 2015. We still hold reciprocal Years of the Russian Language and Literature in Germany and Years of the German Language and Literature in Russia. This year is to be the year of youth exchanges. So the relations are still developing, thank God, and I hope they will develop further. We will overcome the difficulties we are facing today.

Bild: If I got you right, NATO should have told the East European states there and then that it would not admit them? Do you believe NATO could have survived that?

Vladimir Putin: Certainly.

Bild: Yet this has been set forth in the NATO Charter.

Vladimir Putin: The Charter is written by people, isn’t it? Does the Charter say that NATO is obliged to admit everyone who would like to join? No. There should be certain criteria and conditions. If there had been political will, if they had wanted to, they could have done anything. They just did not want to. They wanted to reign.

So they sat on the throne. And then? And then came crises that we are now discussing. If they had followed the advice the old wise German, Mr Egon Bahr gave them, they would have created something new that would unite Europe and prevent crises. The situation would have been different, there would have been different issues. Perhaps they would not have been that acute, you see.

Bild: There is a theory saying that there are two Mr Putins: the first one was young pre-2007 Mr Putin who showed solidarity with the United States and who was friends with Mr Schroeder, and then, after 2007, another Mr Putin came. Back in 2000 you said, “We should have no confrontations in Europe, we should do everything to overcome them.” And now we have found ourselves in such confrontation.

May I ask you a straightforward question? When we are going to have the first Mr Putin back?

Vladimir Putin: I have never changed. First, I still feel young today. I was and I continue to be Mr Schroeder’s friend. Nothing has changed.

My attitude to such issues as the fight against terrorism has not changed either. It is true, on September 11 I was the first to call President Bush and express my solidarity. Indeed, we stood ready to do everything to combat terrorism together. Not so long ago, after the terrorist attacks in Paris, I called and then met the President of France.

If anyone had listened to Gerhard Schroeder, to Jacques Chirac, to me, perhaps there would have been none of the recent terrorist attacks in Paris, as there would have been no upsurge of terrorism in Iraq, Libya, or other countries in the Middle East.

We are faced with common threats, and we still want all countries, both in Europe and the whole world, to join their efforts to combat these threats, and we are still striving for this. I refer not only to terrorism, but also to crime, trafficking in persons, environmental protection, and many other common challenges. Yet this does not mean that it is us who should agree with everything that others decide on these or other matters. Furthermore, if someone is not happy with our stance, they could find a better option than declaring us an enemy every time. Would not it be better to listen to us, to critically reflect on what we say, to agree to something and to look for a common solution? That was what I referred to at the celebration of the 70th anniversary of the United Nations in New York.

Bild: I would like to express the view that today the fight against Islamic terrorism is such an acute issue that it could bring Russia and the West back together in this fight, but the problem of Crimea arises. Is Crimea really worth putting cooperation with the West at stake?

Vladimir Putin: What do you mean when you say ‘Crimea’?

Bild: Redrawn boundaries.

Vladimir Putin: And what I mean is people – 2.5 million of them. These are the people that were frightened by the coup; let’s be frank, they were worried by the coup d’état in Ukraine. And after the coup in Kiev – and it was nothing but a coup d’état, no matter how the extreme nationalist forces, the forces that were coming to power at that moment and largely stayed there, tried to sugar it up – they just began to openly threaten people. To threaten Russians and Russian-speaking people living in Ukraine and in Crimea in particular, because it was more densely populated by Russians and Russian-speaking than other parts of Ukraine.

What was our reaction? We did not make war, nor did we occupy anyone; there was no shooting, no one got killed during the events in Crimea. Not a single person! We used the Armed Forces only to stop more than 20,000 Ukrainian service members stationed there from interfering with the free expression of will by the residents of Crimea. People came to the referendum and cast their vote. They chose to be part of Russia.

Here is a question: what is democracy? Democracy is the will of the people. People voted for the life they wanted. It is not the territory and borders that I am concerned about but the fates of people.

Bild: But borders are a component of the European political order. You have previously said that this is actually very important, including in the context of the NATO expansion.

Vladimir Putin: It is important to always respect international law. In Crimea, there was no violation of international law. Under the United Nations Charter, every nation has the right to self-determination. Concerning Kosovo, the UN International Court of Justice ruled that, when it comes to sovereignty, the opinion of the central government can be ignored. If you are a serious periodical that is honest with its readers, find the transcript of the statement made by the German representative in the International Court of Justice in the archives and cite it. Take the letter, which I believe was written by the US Department of State, or the statement made by the British representative. Find them and read them. Kosovo declared its independence, and the whole world accepted it. Do you know how it in fact happened?

Bild: After the war?

Vladimir Putin: No, it was done by a decision of the Parliament. There was even no referendum held.

What happened in Crimea? Firstly, the Crimean Parliament was elected in 2010, that is when Crimea was still part of Ukraine. This fact I am talking about is extremely important. The Parliament that had been elected while Crimea was part of Ukraine met and voted for independence and called a referendum. Then the citizens voted at the referendum for reunification with Russia. Moreover, as you pointed out quite correctly, the events in Kosovo took place after several years of war and the de-facto intervention by NATO countries, after the bombing of Yugoslavia and missile strikes targeting Belgrade.

Now I want to ask you this: if the Kosovans in Kosovo have the right to self-determination, why don’t the Crimeans have the same right? If we want the relations between Russia and our friends and neighbours in Europe and around the world to develop in a positive and constructive manner, at least one condition must be observed: we need to respect each other, each other’s interests and follow the same rules instead of constantly changing them to suit someone’s interests.

You asked me if I was a friend or not. The relations between states are a little different from those between individuals. I am no friend, bride or groom; I am the President of the Russian Federation. That is 146 million people! These people have their own interests, and I must protect those interests. We are ready to do this in a non-confrontational manner, to look for compromise but, of course, based on international law, which must be understood uniformly by all.

Bild: If, as you say, there was no violation of international law in Crimea, how can you explain to your people that because of that step the West, including at Ms Merkel’s initiative, imposed sanctions against Russia that the Russian population is now suffering from?

Vladimir Putin: You know, the Russian people feel in their hearts and understand in their minds very well what is happening. Napoleon once said that justice is the embodiment of God on earth. In this sense, the reunification of Crimea with Russia was a just decision.

As to the reaction of our western partners, I believe that it was wrong and it was not aimed at supporting Ukraine but at suppressing the growth of Russia’s capabilities. I believe that this should not be done and this is the main mistake; on the contrary, we need to use each other’s capabilities for mutual growth, to address common issues together.

You have mentioned sanctions. In my view, this was a foolish decision and a harmful one. I have said that our turnover with Germany amounted to $83–85 billion, and thousands of jobs were created in Germany as a result of this cooperation. And what are the restrictions that we are facing? This is not the worst thing we are going through, but it is harmful for our economy anyway, since it affects our access to international financial markets.

As to the worst harm inflicted by today’s situation, first of all on our economy, it is the harm caused by the falling prices on our traditional export goods. However, both the former and the latter have their positive aspects. When oil prices are high, it is very difficult for us to resist spending oil revenues to cover current expenses. I believe that our non-oil and gas deficit had risen to a very dangerous level. So now we are forced to lower it. And this is healthy…

Bild: For the budget deficit?

Vladimir Putin: We divide it. There is the total deficit and then there are non-oil and gas revenues. There are revenues from oil and gas, and we divide all the rest as well.

The total deficit is quite small. But when you subtract the non-oil and gas deficit, then you see that the oil and gas deficit is too large. In order to reduce it, such countries as Norway, for example, put a significant proportion of non-oil and gas revenues into the reserve. It is very difficult, I repeat, to resist spending oil and gas revenues to cover current expenses. It is the reduction of these expenses that improves the economy. That is the first point.

Second point. You can buy anything with petrodollars. High oil revenues discourage development, especially in the high technology sectors. We are witnessing a decrease in GDP by 3.8 percent, in industrial production by 3.3 percent and an increase in inflation, which has reached 12.7 percent. This is a lot, but we still have a surplus in foreign trade, and the total exports of goods with high added value have grown significantly for the first time in years. That is an expressly positive trend in the economy.

The reserves are still at a high level, and the Central Bank has about 340 billion in gold and foreign currency reserves. If I am not mistaken, they amount to over 300. There are also two reserve funds of the Government of the Russian Federation, each of which amounts to $70 to $80 billion. One of them holds $70 billion, the other – $80 billion. We believe that we will be steadily moving towards stabilisation and economic growth. We have adopted a whole range of programmes, including those aimed at import replacement, which means investing in high technologies.

Bild: You have often discussed the issue of sanctions as well as the issue of Crimea with Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel. Do you understand her? Do you trust her?

Vladimir Putin: I am certain that she is a very sincere person. There is a framework within which she has to work but I have no doubt that she is sincere in her efforts to find solutions, including to the situation in southeast Ukraine.

You spoke of sanctions. Everyone says that the Minsk Agreements must be implemented and then the sanctions issue may be reconsidered. This is beginning to resemble the theatre of the absurd because everything essential that needs to be done with regard to implementing the Minsk Agreements is the responsibility of the current Kiev authorities. You cannot demand that Moscow do something that needs to be done by Kiev. For example, the main, the key issue in the settlement process is political in its nature and the constitutional reform lies in its core. This is Point 11 of the Minsk Agreements. It expressly states that the constitutional reform must be carried out and it is not Moscow that is to make these decisions.

Look, everything is provided for: Ukraine is to carry out a constitutional reform with its entry into force by the end of 2015 (Paragraph 11). Now 2015 is over.

Bild: The constitutional reform must be carried out after the end of all military hostilities. Is that what the paragraph says?

Vladimir Putin: No, it is not.

Look, I will give you the English version. What does it say? Paragraph 9 – reinstatement of full control of the state border by the government of Ukraine based on the Ukrainian law on constitutional reform by the end of 2015, provided that Paragraph 11 has been fulfilled, which stipulates constitutional reform.

Consequently, the constitutional reform and political processes are to be implemented first, followed by confidence building on the basis of those reforms and the completion of all processes, including the border closure. I believe that our European partners, both the German Chancellor and the French President should scrutinise these matters more thoroughly.

Bild: Do you think this is not so?

Vladimir Putin: I think they have a lot of problems of their own. But if we are addressing this matter then we must scrutinise it. For example, it says here that changes to the Constitution should be permanent. The Ukrainian Government introduced the law on the special status of those territories, a law that had been adopted earlier, into the transitional provisions. But this law, which they incorporated in the Constitution, was adopted for the duration of three years only. Two years have already passed. When we met in Paris, both the German Chancellor and the French President agreed that this law should be changed and included in the Constitution on a permanent basis. Both the President of France and the Chancellor of Germany confirmed that. Moreover, the current version of the Constitution has not even been approved and the law has not become permanent. How can demands be made on Moscow to do what in fact must be done inline with the decisions of our colleagues in Kiev?

Bild: What is your attitude towards the Federal Chancellor now? You said some time ago that you admired many of her personal qualities. How do things stand now?

Vladimir Putin: When did I say that?

Bild: That you respect her.

Vladimir Putin: I feel the same way now. I have already said that she is very sincere and highly professional. In any case, I think the level of trust between us is very high.

Bild: Let me ask you a personal question. When the Federal Chancellor visited you in Sochi in January 2007, did you know that she was afraid of dogs?

Vladimir Putin: No, of course not. I did not know anything about that. I showed her my dog because I thought she would like it. I told her so later and apologised.

Bild: Mr President, will you take any steps to re-establish the G7 format as the G8?

And another question: what did you think when the US President said that Russia is a regional power?

Vladimir Putin: I did not think anything in particular. Every individual, all the more so the President of the United States, is entitled to his or her own opinion on anything, on partners and on other countries. That is his own opinion, as I also know his opinion that the American nation, the United States is unique. I cannot agree with either of those opinions.

Let me clarify a few things about Russia. First, we do not claim the role of a superpower. This role is very costly and it is meaningless. Our economy is fifth or sixth in the world in terms of volume. It may have moved down to a lower place at present taking into account the economic difficulties I have mentioned but we are confident that we have very good development prospects and potential. We occupy, roughly, the sixth place in the world in terms of purchasing power parity.

If we say that Russia is a regional power, we should first determine what region we are referring to. Look at the map and ask: “What is it, is it part of Europe? Or is it part of the eastern region, bordering on Japan and the United States, if we mean Alaska and China? Or is it part of Asia? Or perhaps the southern region?” Or look at the north. Essentially, in the north we border on Canada across the Arctic Ocean. Or in the south? Where is it? What region are we speaking about? I think that speculations about other countries, an attempt to speak disrespectfully about other countries is an attempt to prove one’s exceptionalism by contrast. In my view, that is a misguided position.

Bild: And what about the G8?

Vladimir Putin: We planned to host the G8 summit in 2014. I think Russia never became a full-fledged G8 member, since there were always separate negotiations between foreign ministers of the other seven countries. I would not say that this mechanism is useless. Meetings, discussions, seeking solutions together are always beneficial.

I believe that Russia’s presence was useful, since it provided an alternative view on some issues under discussion. We examine pretty much the same issues within the G20, APEC in the East and within BRICS. We were ready to host the G8 summit in 2014. It was not us who did not go somewhere; other countries did not come to Russia. If our counterparts decide to come for a visit, they will be most welcome, but we have not booked any tickets yet.

Bild: What do you think about the possibility of re-establishing cooperation, if not within the G8, then, perhaps, with NATO? There was the Russia-NATO Council after all, and you conducted joint military exercises. Is there a chance to re-establish such cooperation or should we forego the prospect altogether?

Vladimir Putin: At the outset, the idea of creating the Council was actively supported, if not initiated, by Mr Berlusconi, the former Prime Minister of Italy, and I believe it was in Italy that we signed the document on establishing the Russia-NATO Council. It was not Russia that cut off cooperation through the G8 or the Russia-NATO Council. We are willing to interact with everyone, once there is a matter for common discussion. We think that there is one, but a relationship can be happy only when the feeling is mutual. If we are not welcome as partners, that is fine with us then.

Bild: Regrettably, at the moment the Russia-NATO relations are at the stage of confrontation, rather than cooperation. Turkish military forces have downed a Russian aircraft, and Russian and Turkish warships are reported to come dangerously close to one another all the more often. Do you think that such developments may at a certain point cause an escalation from a cold war to actual hostilities?

Vladimir Putin: Turkey is a NATO member. However, the problems that have emerged have nothing to do with Turkey’s NATO membership; nobody has attacked Turkey. Instead of trying to provide us with an explanation for the war crime they committed, that is, for downing our fighter jet that was targeting terrorists, the Turkish government rushed to NATO headquarters seeking protection, which looks quite odd and, in my view, humiliating for Turkey.

I repeat, NATO has to protect its members from attack, but nobody has attacked Turkey. If Turkey has vested interests elsewhere in the world, in the adjacent countries, does it mean that NATO must protect and secure these interests? Does it mean that Germany, as a NATO member, must help Turkey to expand into neighbouring territories?

I hope that such incidents will not cause large-scale hostilities. Of course, we all realise that Russia, once under threat, would defend its security interests by all available means at its disposal, should such threats against Russia arise.

Bild: Now let’s turn to Syria, if you do not mind.

We say that we are tackling common challenges there. This is the joint fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. However, some people in the West say that Russian military forces in Syria are fighting the anti-Assad rebels, rather than ISIS. What would be your response to the allegations that Russia is hitting the wrong targets?

Vladimir Putin: They are telling lies. Look, the videos that support this version appeared before our pilots even started to carry out strikes against terrorists. This can be corroborated. However, those who criticise us prefer to ignore it.

American pilots hit the Doctors Without Borders hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, by mistake, I am sure. There were casualties and fatalities among civilians and doctors. Western media outlets have attempted to hush this up, to drop the subject and have a very short memory span when it comes to such things. They mentioned it a couple of times and put it on ice. And those few mentions were only due to foreign citizens from the Doctors Without Borders present there.

Who now remembers the wiped out wedding parties? Over 100 people were killed with a single strike.

Yet this phony evidence about our pilots reportedly striking civilian targets keeps circulating. If we tag the “live pipelines” that consist of thousands of petrol and oil tankers as civilian targets, than, indeed, one might believe that our pilots are bombing these targets, but everyone is bombing them, including the Americans, the French and everyone else.

Bild: However, it is clear that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is carrying out strikes against his own population. Can we say that al-Assad is your ally?

Vladimir Putin: You know, this is a rather subtle issue. I think that President al-Assad has made many mistakes in the course of the Syrian conflict. However, don’t we all realise full well that this conflict would never have escalated to such a degree if it had not been supported from abroad through supplying money, weapons and fighters? Tragically, it is civilians who suffer in such conflicts.

But who is responsible for that? Is it the government, which seeks to secure its sovereignty and fights these anti-constitutional actions, or those who have masterminded the anti-government insurgency?

Regarding your question if al-Assad is an ally or not and our goals in Syria. I can tell you precisely what we do not want to happen: we do not want the Libyan or Iraqi scenario to be repeated in Syria. I have to give due credit to Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, and I told him this myself, because had he not taken on the responsibility, demonstrated fortitude and brought the country under control, then we might have witnessed the Libyan scenario in Egypt. In my view, no effort should be spared in strengthening legitimate governments in the region’s countries. That also applies to Syria. Emerging state institutions in Iraq and in Libya must be revived and strengthened. Situations in Somalia and other countries must be stabilised. State authority in Afghanistan must be reinforced. However, it does not mean that everything should be left as is. Indeed, this new stability would underpin political reforms.

As far as Syria is concerned, I think that we should work towards a constitutional reform. It is a complicated process. Then, early presidential and parliamentary elections should be held, based on the new Constitution. It is the Syrian people themselves who must decide who and how should run their country. This is the only way to achieve stability and security, to create conditions for economic growth and prosperity, so that people can live in their own homes, in their homeland, rather than flee to Europe.

Bild: But do you believe al-Assad is a legitimate leader if he allows the destruction of his country’s population?

Vladimir Putin: It is not his goal to destroy his country’s population. He is fighting those who rose up against him with deadly force. And if the civilians suffer, I think that the primary responsibility for this is with those who fight against him with deadly force as well as those who assist armed groups.

As I have already said, though, this does not mean that everything is all right out there and that everyone is right. This is exactly why I believe political reforms are needed so much there. The first step in that direction should be to develop and adopt a new Constitution.

Bild: If, contrary to expectations, al-Assad loses the elections, will you grant him the possibility of asylum in your country?

Vladimir Putin: I think it is quite premature to discuss this. We granted asylum to Mr Snowden, which was far more difficult than to do the same for Mr al-Assad.

First, the Syrian people should be given the opportunity to have their say. I assure you, if this process is conducted democratically, then al-Assad will probably not need to leave the country at all. And it is not important whether he remains President or not.

You have been talking about our targets and means, and now you are talking about al-Assad being our ally. Do you know that we support military operations of the armed opposition that combats ISIS? Armed opposition against al-Assad that is fighting ISIS. We coordinate our joint operations with them and support their offensives by airstrikes in various sections of the frontline. This is hundreds, thousands of armed people fighting ISIS. We support both the al-Assad’s army and the armed opposition. Some of them have publicly declared this, others prefer to remain silent, but the work is on-going.

Bild: Finally, I would like to touch upon a topic that has never come up before, that is the rift between Saudi Arabia and Iran, as if Syria was not enough. Does it mean that this rift can lead us to a very grave conflict?

Vladimir Putin: It hampers the efforts to settle the Syrian crisis and the fight against terrorism, as well as the process of halting the inflow of refugees to Europe, that much is certain.

As for whether this will lead to a major regional clash, I do not know. I would rather not talk or even think in these terms. We have very good relations with Iran and our partnership with Saudi Arabia is stable.

Of course, we regret that these things happened there. But you have no death penalty in your country, right? Despite a very hard period in the 1990s–early 2000s, when we were fighting terrorism in Russia, we abolished the death penalty. And there is no death penalty in Russia at present. There are certain countries that use the death penalty – Saudi Arabia, the United States and some others.

We regret this has happened, especially given that the cleric had not been fighting against Saudi Arabia with lethal force. Yet it is true that an embassy attack is a totally unacceptable occurrence in the modern world. As far as I know, the Iranian authorities have arrested several perpetrators of the assault. If our participation in any form is needed, we are ready to do everything possible to resolve the conflict as soon as possible.

Bild: One last question, Mr President.

During the preparations for the Winter Olympics in Sochi, there was heavy criticism in the West of democratic development and human rights situation in Russia. Do you expect similar criticism to arise again during the preparations for the 2018 FIFA World Cup?

I think the Russian language is more extensive than German. (Noting the long translation of the question from German into Russian.)

Vladimir Putin: I would say the German language is more precise.

The Russian language is more diverse, more elegant. However, such genius minds as, say, Goethe make the German language sound very elegant and beautiful. One can feel its beauty only in German, and to be able to feel it one needs to understand it.

As far as democracy is concerned, the ruling classes usually talk about freedom to pull the wool over the eyes of those whom they govern. There is nothing new about democracy in Russia. As we have already identified, democracy is the rule of the people and the influence of the people over the authorities. We have learned very well the lesson of one-party rule – that of the Communist Party (CPSU). Therefore, we made our choice long ago and we will continue developing democratic institutions in our country. At present, 77 political parties can take part in parliamentary elections in Russia. We have come back to direct gubernatorial elections.

We are advancing the instruments of direct democracy, meaning various public organisations, and will continue to do so. There can be no identical clichés in democracy – be it American, European (German), Russian or Indian. Do you know that twice in American history the President was elected by the majority of delegates representing the minority of voters? Does it mean the absence of democracy? Of course not. But it is not the only or the most important problem. One of the European leaders once told me: “In the United States it is impossible to run for presidency without a few billion dollars in your pocket.”

Now, regarding the parliamentary system of democracy.

I am repeatedly asked: “How long have you been President?” But in a parliamentary democracy, the person number one is the Prime Minister, who can head the Government an unlimited number of times.

We have returned to direct elections of regional heads. In some countries, however, heads of regions are appointed by the central government. I am not sure, I may be wrong, it is probably better to leave it out or to double-check it, but, as far as I know, that is the case in India.

We still have a number of problems to solve before people feel confident that they have real influence over the authorities and that the authorities respond to their demands. We are going to work towards improving our instruments.

As for the attempts to use sport in political rifts and political competition, I believe that is a huge mistake. That is what stupid people do. If problems arise, particularly at the interstate level, sport, art, music, ballet and opera are the very means that should bring people closer together rather than divide them. It is vital to foster this role of art and sport rather than belittle and suppress it.

Bild: Thank you, Mr President, for a wonderful and very detailed conversation.

%d bloggers like this: