donnay
Member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
- Messages
- 42,534
This Is What Russia Really Wants
Brandon T. Ward
If we listen to Western media and governments, they tell us Russia is thisclose to invading Ukraine. In fact, Biden just said, he is convinced Russia will invade Ukraine within days. Those days have now passed.
However, we rarely, if ever hear the Russian side of the argument.
So after writing Friday’s article, I decided to heed Mom’s advice to us kids growing up, (see: Will Russia Really Go To War With Ukraine?). Always listen to both sides of an argument.
So I did, and found some very interesting details…
What We Already Know
Before I dive into those details, I want you to recall the scenario at hand.
The West wants to bring Ukraine into NATO to have a military and strategic position against Russia. Literally, NATO wants to become closer neighbors with Russia. I mean, that’s just obvious as day. Yet, NATO is a military alliance that was designed to thwart Soviet Russia from long ago.
Now in the first article I wrote on this new global drama, I included a link to a video clip from Russia’s Press Secretary. He flat out said, ‘Russia is not, and has not planned any invasion into Ukraine.’
He followed that up by saying,
“We’re living in a world of fake accusations, fake news and in a world of lies. Until it is proven somehow […] we will continue to presume it is fake news.”
While Biden Talks Russian War, America Falls Apart
Who can argue with that?
Now, in Friday’s article, I explained when Russian President Vladimir Putin was asked about the possibility of war, he said,
“We do not want war in Europe.”
Will Russia Really Go To War With Ukraine?
Ukraine is in Europe.
So,
All we hear from Western media and government is Russia wants war.
All we hear from the Russian government is they do not want war.
Someone is lying…
All of these conflicting details have been bothering me.
It was after Friday’s article that I decided, I need to do some more digging around.
Remember those interesting details I found?
Let’s dive in…
The Diplomacy Letter
This is all critical to understand.
U.S. Ambassador John Sullivan was provided Russia’s response to a draft treaty in person by the Russian Foreign Ministry. This concerns some of the back and forth that have taken place, discussions we do not hear about from the media.
This letter is dated February 17th.
We state that the American side did not give a constructive response to the basic elements of the draft treaty with the United States prepared by the Russian side on security guarantees. We are talking about the rejection of further expansion of NATO, the withdrawal of the “Bucharest formula” that “Ukraine and Georgia will become members of NATO“, and the rejection of the creation of military bases on the territory of states that were previously part of the USSR and are not members of the alliance, including the use of their infrastructure for conducting any military activity, as well as the return of military capabilities, including strike, and NATO infrastructure to the state of 1997, when the Russia-NATO Founding Act was signed. These provisions are of fundamental importance for the Russian Federation.
Apparently, the United States blew off Russia’s requests in the original draft treaty.
Yet, it certainly becomes clear. Russia does not want NATO at its doorstep. To put this in perspective, the U.S. would never accept the Russian military in Mexico, especially Canada.
There is much more to this letter.
The growing military activity of the United States and NATO directly at Russian borders is alarming, while our “red lines” and fundamental security interests, as well as Russia’s sovereign right to protect them, continue to be ignored.
If you look at this NATO map, we can see that NATO is already touching Russia’s border.
Look what else we have…
In the absence of the readiness of the American side to agree on firm, legally binding guarantees to ensure our security from the United States and its allies, Russia will be forced to respond, including through the implementation of military-technical measures.
Russia is simply saying, if the United States will not address Russian security concerns as outlined in the first paragraph, they will respond militarily and technically, (think cyberattacks).
Can anyone really argue with Russia’s position here?
Now what about all this Ukraine business?
Russian And Ukraine Diplomacy
Let’s continue with the letter handed to U.S. Ambassador Sullivan.
There is no and is not planned any “Russian invasion” of Ukraine, which the United States and its allies have been declaring at the official level since autumn last year, therefore statements about Russia’s “responsibility for the escalation” cannot be regarded otherwise than as an attempt to put pressure on and devalue Russia’s proposals for security guarantees.
How many times does Russia need to say it?
They are not planning to invade Ukraine.
In fact, where is the proof that 190,000 Russian troops are on the Ukrainian border?
This all reminds me of U.S. President George Bush telling us on national television that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Turned out, they never did. Of course, we discovered that after we conquered and plundered the nation.
So Russia contends, this “Russian invasion” rhetoric is a cover story to delegitimize Russia’s demands for NATO to withdraw. In my mind, this all seems much more plausible than Russia wanting to invade neighboring Ukraine for some unknown reason.
Oh, but there is much more!
Here is another reason why Ukraine is such a “red line” for Russia.
Back in 2014, Crimea was annexed by Russia…
The decision of the people of Crimea and Sevastopol to return to the Russian Federation was made by free will in the exercise of the right to self-determination enshrined in the UN Charter. No force or threat of force was used.
Get that?
Continued...
Brandon T. Ward
If we listen to Western media and governments, they tell us Russia is thisclose to invading Ukraine. In fact, Biden just said, he is convinced Russia will invade Ukraine within days. Those days have now passed.
However, we rarely, if ever hear the Russian side of the argument.
So after writing Friday’s article, I decided to heed Mom’s advice to us kids growing up, (see: Will Russia Really Go To War With Ukraine?). Always listen to both sides of an argument.
So I did, and found some very interesting details…
What We Already Know
Before I dive into those details, I want you to recall the scenario at hand.
The West wants to bring Ukraine into NATO to have a military and strategic position against Russia. Literally, NATO wants to become closer neighbors with Russia. I mean, that’s just obvious as day. Yet, NATO is a military alliance that was designed to thwart Soviet Russia from long ago.
Now in the first article I wrote on this new global drama, I included a link to a video clip from Russia’s Press Secretary. He flat out said, ‘Russia is not, and has not planned any invasion into Ukraine.’
He followed that up by saying,
“We’re living in a world of fake accusations, fake news and in a world of lies. Until it is proven somehow […] we will continue to presume it is fake news.”
While Biden Talks Russian War, America Falls Apart
Who can argue with that?
Now, in Friday’s article, I explained when Russian President Vladimir Putin was asked about the possibility of war, he said,
“We do not want war in Europe.”
Will Russia Really Go To War With Ukraine?
Ukraine is in Europe.
So,
All we hear from Western media and government is Russia wants war.
All we hear from the Russian government is they do not want war.
Someone is lying…
All of these conflicting details have been bothering me.
It was after Friday’s article that I decided, I need to do some more digging around.
Remember those interesting details I found?
Let’s dive in…
The Diplomacy Letter
This is all critical to understand.
U.S. Ambassador John Sullivan was provided Russia’s response to a draft treaty in person by the Russian Foreign Ministry. This concerns some of the back and forth that have taken place, discussions we do not hear about from the media.
This letter is dated February 17th.
We state that the American side did not give a constructive response to the basic elements of the draft treaty with the United States prepared by the Russian side on security guarantees. We are talking about the rejection of further expansion of NATO, the withdrawal of the “Bucharest formula” that “Ukraine and Georgia will become members of NATO“, and the rejection of the creation of military bases on the territory of states that were previously part of the USSR and are not members of the alliance, including the use of their infrastructure for conducting any military activity, as well as the return of military capabilities, including strike, and NATO infrastructure to the state of 1997, when the Russia-NATO Founding Act was signed. These provisions are of fundamental importance for the Russian Federation.
Apparently, the United States blew off Russia’s requests in the original draft treaty.
Yet, it certainly becomes clear. Russia does not want NATO at its doorstep. To put this in perspective, the U.S. would never accept the Russian military in Mexico, especially Canada.
There is much more to this letter.
The growing military activity of the United States and NATO directly at Russian borders is alarming, while our “red lines” and fundamental security interests, as well as Russia’s sovereign right to protect them, continue to be ignored.
If you look at this NATO map, we can see that NATO is already touching Russia’s border.
Look what else we have…
In the absence of the readiness of the American side to agree on firm, legally binding guarantees to ensure our security from the United States and its allies, Russia will be forced to respond, including through the implementation of military-technical measures.
Russia is simply saying, if the United States will not address Russian security concerns as outlined in the first paragraph, they will respond militarily and technically, (think cyberattacks).
Can anyone really argue with Russia’s position here?
Now what about all this Ukraine business?
Russian And Ukraine Diplomacy
Let’s continue with the letter handed to U.S. Ambassador Sullivan.
There is no and is not planned any “Russian invasion” of Ukraine, which the United States and its allies have been declaring at the official level since autumn last year, therefore statements about Russia’s “responsibility for the escalation” cannot be regarded otherwise than as an attempt to put pressure on and devalue Russia’s proposals for security guarantees.
How many times does Russia need to say it?
They are not planning to invade Ukraine.
In fact, where is the proof that 190,000 Russian troops are on the Ukrainian border?
This all reminds me of U.S. President George Bush telling us on national television that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Turned out, they never did. Of course, we discovered that after we conquered and plundered the nation.
So Russia contends, this “Russian invasion” rhetoric is a cover story to delegitimize Russia’s demands for NATO to withdraw. In my mind, this all seems much more plausible than Russia wanting to invade neighboring Ukraine for some unknown reason.
Oh, but there is much more!
Here is another reason why Ukraine is such a “red line” for Russia.
Back in 2014, Crimea was annexed by Russia…
The decision of the people of Crimea and Sevastopol to return to the Russian Federation was made by free will in the exercise of the right to self-determination enshrined in the UN Charter. No force or threat of force was used.
Get that?
Continued...
