Will EU push Kiev back to Minsk II, or is it EU Duplicity?


August 27th, 2015

NovorosInform – translated for Fort Russ by J. Arnoldski

“A forcing back
to Minsk-2 or Duplicity?”

Calling Petro Poroshenko to the carpet in Berlin right on
Ukrainian Independence Day showed not only the degree of the actual independence
of the country, but the real extent of the independence of Europe. Outwardly,
of course, everything looked pretty decent – “Bad boy Pete” was
chided for violations of the Minsk agreements and ordered to make peace with
Russia. In fact, this isn’t entirely true.

On the one hand, Francois Hollande and Angela Merkel made it
clear that the EU will insist on the fulfillment by Ukraine of the Minsk-2
agreements that were reached. The Chancellor of Germany, stressing that the
ceasefire in Donbass is not respected, that the different parties constantly
claim violations of the ceasefire, and the withdrawal of heavy weapons from
the separation line has not been carried out, said it is necessary “to
finish, finally, the withdrawal of heavy weapons from the demarcation
line”. In turn, French President Francois Hollande, noting the lack of
progress on the issue of the ceasefire, said that the countries of the Normandy
format should ensure that the residents in the east receive legal
representatives and that their interests are not ignored.

In addition, the head of the German government, promising to
report to Putin about the results of the talks, stressed that “it is
impossible to refuse ties with Moscow, even though meeting with Putin in the
quadripartite format didn’t happen.” Literally a few days earlier, French
foreign Minister L. Fabius, in an interview with JDD, said: “The Minsk
agreements, for which we share responsibility, defined the conditions under
which Ukraine could return to correct relations both with Russia and with the
European Union. This is our compass.” This position is very constructive, if
not for a few “buts”.

Firstly, Europe has not refrained from indicting rhetoric,
playing the role of the judge ,and of persistent attempts to qualify the events
in Ukraine as a war with Russia. 

The above-mentioned L Fabius promised “to remind them
both that they cannot do anything else than fulfill that which was promised,
otherwise they will be published.” The hypocrisy is obvious, since diplomatic
vehicles from EU countries covered the putschists from the “Berkut”
charge, and the fiery speeches of European politicians from the rostrum of the
Maidan went around the world. And if someone is to be considered a party of the
conflict which led to the civil war in Ukraine, it is the Europeans themselves.

Secondly, at the final press conference following the talks,
neither Merkel nor Hollande denied the outright lies of Poroshenko that
“Ukraine is committed to implementing the commitments in respect to the
ceasefire, cooperation with the OSCE, the withdrawal of heavy equipment, and
the fulfillment of humanitarian issues”. There was no confusion among
European leaders and the gallant “we” in the opus: “We declare
clearly that today, unfortunately, the Russian Federation and the militants
that it supports represent a common threat to peace and stability in the
region”. Presumably, they agree with these words.

But if the lack of refutation of the outright lies during the
press-conference can be attributed to the exclusive manners of A. Merkel and F.
Hollande and the requirements of diplomatic protocol, then the “amazing”
blindness of the leaders of leading countries of the European Union regarding
the actions of the Kiev regime suggests that they condone the aggressive plans
of Kiev.

In just a few hours before departure to Berlin, at the parade in
honor of independence day, Poroshenko quite frankly admitted that just the
night before, the largest group of tanks, howitzers, armored vehicles, and
artillery in the history of Ukraine was sent to the war zone. Before the end of
the year, “the peacemaker” Poroshenko promised this year to give the
army 300 armored personnel carriers, 400 BMP, 30 thousand missiles, ammunition,
increase defense spending, and to continue the wave of mobilization called
“mogilization” [tomb-ization or grave-ization – J. Arnoldski] by the people.

Heavy guns are not only not taken away from the line of contact,
but continue to be used for the brutal shelling of Donbass cities. According to
the Deputy Commander of the militia of the DPR, Eduard Basurin, in only the
last week preceding Poroshenko’s visit in Berlin, Ukrainian punitive forces
“released 520 projectiles from MRL’s, 422 artillery shells of a calibre of
152 and 122 millimeters, 116 tank shells, and 581 mortar shells with a caliber
82 of 120 millimeters.” While writing these lines, the author’s sister from
Gorlovka called and reported that on the night of August 24-25, immediately
after the false assurances Poroshenko, around 20 shells fell where she lives
and destroyed several homes, two schools and a kindergarten.

Contrary to the provisions of the Minsk agreements, the
transport blockade of Donbass has been strengthened. On August 17, the National
Security Council of Ukraine adopted a decision to close several transport
corridors to DPR and LPR. The need to ensure security during attacks motivates
the Ukrainian side to take this step. But what stops the punitive forces, who
have since March banned the delivery of food to the rebellious republics, from
stopping the shelling?

The plans of Kiev to effect a large-scale offensive against
Donetsk are more and more clearly visible. Plans of the General Staff to
destroy the republics were transmitted by representatives of the Ministry of
Defense of Ukraine to the militia of Novorossiya, and on August 24, fighters
recorded that the UAF is removing minefields in order to allow the passage of
military equipment. Ukrainian politician, V. Volga, reported on his blog on
Facebook that hospitals in Mariupol, Severodonetsk, Dnepropetrovsk, and
Zaporozhye are preparing to receive a large number of wounded.

However, such blindness of Europeans is not surprising, since on
the Ukrainian side in the civil not only mercenaries but also military
personnel from the EU countries are involved. According to the newly appointed
Ambassador of Ukraine to the USA, V. Chaly, Ukraine receives new weapons
“including lethal weapons, and no one can deny this to a sovereign Ukraine.
Another thing that is not acceptable is to publicize the list of countries, but
it’s more than a dozen states from Europe. We have different levels of
military-technical cooperation, and this is developing at the current stage.”

The Austrian journal, Contra Magazine, confirmed this
information, and writes that “For a long time supplies of arms from the West
have been going to Ukraine. EU governments and the US deny this. Nevertheless,
Poroshenko said that Kiev received 500 units of special equipment from abroad.”

Local residents of the DPR and LPR, as well as the militia have
reported a sharp increase in the use of unknown weapons of foreign manufacture
by Ukrainian punitive forces, the calibers of which far exceed what is
permitted by the Minsk Agreements.

Thus, with one hand Europe holds P. Poroshenko back from ripping
into battle, and with the other hand rushes him weapons to continue the war
against his own citizens. The EU is torn between the desire to secure the
safety of its own borders, forever getting rid of the unreliable partner always
asking for money, and striving to keep in power the puppet regime falling into
financial abyss, which it supported.

Whether A. Merkel and F. Hollande successfully held Poroshenko
back from a suicidal offensive will be seen the coming days. In any case, it
will not be decided in Kiev, or even in Berlin, but in Washington.

- Advertisement -

Subscribe to our newsletter
Sign up here to get the latest news, updates and special offers delivered directly to your inbox.