[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
World News See other World News Articles Title: Kissinger warning at Davos: Ukraine war will set us back decades Kissinger warning at Davos: Ukraine war will set us back decades (1) Kissinger warning at Davos: Ukraine war will set us back decades (2) Transcript: Kissinger warning at Davos (3) Ukraine risks merging with Poland – ex-president Viktor Yanukovych (4) Zelensky announces “historic” joint customs control on border with Poland (5) WaPo: Ukrainian volunteer fighters in the east feel abandoned (1) Kissinger warning at Davos: Ukraine war will set us back decades https://www.indianpunchline.com/ukraine-is-a-millstone-around-europes-neck/ MAY 29, 2022 BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR Ukraine is a millstone around Europe's neck The fallout of the war in Ukraine over Europe is largely seen in terms of the uncertainties over the continent's heavy dependence on Russian energy and the impact of it on the economies of the 27 EU member countries. Imposing restrictions on Russian oil has proven a much more complicated task than imagined previously. Countries that are highly dependent on Russian fossil fuels are concerned about the implications of such measures for their own economies. Hungary, for example, is apparently asking for financial support of between $16 billion and $19 billion to move away from Russian energy. It also refuses to discuss the matter at the upcoming Extraordinary European summit on Monday/Tuesday in Brussels. Prime Minister Viktor Orban asked in a letter to the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, that the embargo be removed from the topics of discussion at the summit. oil Equally, there is much of debris falling on Europe on other fronts. The UN says that as of May 24, 6.6 million refugees have left Ukraine for neighbouring countries. They are entitled to social welfare payments and access to housing, medical treatment and schools. But this coincides with a cost of living crisis in Europe. A confluence of economic shocks continues to threaten the outlook for the EU bloc. The CEOs of several European blue chip companies told CNBC recently that they see a significant recession coming down the pike in Europe. But what is by far most crucial for Europe is the endgame in Ukraine, which Russia cannot afford to lose. Such wars usually end with a dirty diplomatic settlement. Clearly, the initial blue-and-yellow flag-waving phase of the war is steadily giving way to a sombre mood as the slow, grinding phase of the Russian advance in the Donbass and the stunning success in Mariupol bring in grim realities. Henry Kissinger has come out in the open at the World Economic Forum at Davos to argue that Europe needs to have its own independent, and clear-headed definition of its strategic goals. In a conversation with WEF founder Klaus Schwab on Monday, Kissinger made three important points. He said, “Parties should be brought to peace talks within the next two months. Ukraine should've been a bridge between Europe and Russia, but now, as the relationships are reshaped, we may enter a space where the dividing line is redrawn and Russia is entirely isolated.” Kissinger estimated that European interests would be best served by a normalisation of relations and increased cooperation right across the European continent, including Russia and Ukraine. This is the first point. Second, Kissinger's prognosis is that the conflict in Ukraine can permanently restructure the global order. In his words, “We are facing a situation now where Russia could alienate itself completely from Europe and seek a permanent alliance elsewhere. This may lead to Cold War-like diplomatic distances, which will set us back decades. We should strive for long-term peace.” A highly nuanced hint here is that both Europe and Russia's interests vis-a-vis China's rise are congruent and if the Atlanticist politicians in Brussels and their assorted Russophobic allies in Eastern Europe and their mentors in Washington, DC keep pushing the dated Cold War ideology over the long-term political and economic interests of European citizens, the most likely scenario will be even greater Russian rapprochement with China. To quote Kissinger, “Looked at from a long-term point of view, Russia has been, for 400 years, an essential part of Europe, and European policy over that period of time has been affected, fundamentally, by its European assessment of the role of Russia. Sometimes in an observing way, but on a number of occasions as the guarantor, or the instrument, by which the European balance could be re-established. Current policy should keep in mind the restoration of this role is important to develop, so that Russia is not driven into a permanent alliance with China. But European relations with it are not the only key element of this…” What Kissinger didn't say explicitly is that in such a scenario, the EU is destined to suffer a loss of clout and a subaltern role to Washington's, with less strategic autonomy than it would and could have enjoyed, had it not subordinated all of its interests to Washington and had instead maintained a more independent and balanced position. Third, Kissinger argues that realpolitik dictates that the European efforts should concentrate on the resolution of the territorial disputes between Russia and Ukraine: “Ideally, the dividing line should be a return to the status quo ante. Pursuing the war beyond that point will not be about the freedom of Ukraine, but a new war against Russia itself.” By status quo ante, he was of course referring to Kiev's acceptance of Crimea, Lugansk, and Donetsk remaining under Russia's control. In a very refreshing perspective, Kissinger all but hinted that an EU-Ukraine-Russia axis would be competitive with Beijing and Washington on the global playing field. He visualised that China and United States “in the next years have to come to some definition of how to conduct the long-term relationship of countries, it depends on their strategic capacities, but also on their interpretation of these capacities… The challenge is whether this adversarial aspect can be mitigated and progressively eased by the diplomacy that both sides conduct and it cannot be done unilaterally by one side. So, both sides have to come to the conviction that some easing of the political relationship is essential…” Given Kissinger's formidable foreign-policy legacy as a diplomatist and statesman, his remarks are bound to influence the European statesmen about the endgame in Ukraine. The telephone conversation between Russian President Vladimir Putin, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Saturday can be seen against the above backdrop. The conversation took place on the eve of the European summit in Brussels. But Washington has let it be known on Saturday already through a media leak that the Biden Administration is considering the transfer of long-range rocket systems to Ukraine as soon as the coming week. Now, that would be seen as provocation by Russia. All indications are that the Biden administration will not mind a prolonged war in Ukraine and may see advantages in it. The former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich has warned that Ukraine risks not only losing vast territories in its south and east but also a “complete destruction” of its sovereignty. He said the US never really saw Ukraine as an independent country but as a mere “territory from which a total weakening of Russia should begin.” Indeed, Zelensky himself reminds us increasingly of the Christian legend of the Wandering Jew who, as a consequence of rejecting Jesus, is condemned never to die, but to wander homeless through the world. About a month ago, in a rare statement, Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) accused Washington and Warsaw of plotting to restore Polish control over part of western Ukraine, which Poland had ruled at different times in the past, most recently between the two world wars. The territories include the city of Lviv, which were absorbed into the Soviet Union at the end of World War II. The SVR said the US was discussing with Poland a plan under which Polish “peacekeeping” forces without a NATO mandate would enter parts of western Ukraine where the chance of a confrontation with Russian forces was low. The SVR's intelligence scoop presumably triggered an expulsion of 45 Russian diplomats in Poland and a physical attack on the Russian Ambassador at a public function at Warsaw. Curiously, soon afterward, on May 24, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced “joint customs control” on Ukraine's border with Poland, which he described as “also the beginning of our integration into the common customs space of the European Union… (and) a truly historic process.” Zelensky said Ukraine-Poland relations are “finally completely free of quarrels and the legacy of old conflicts. I would like the brotherhood between Ukrainians and Poles to last forever… our unity of Ukrainians and Poles is a constant that no one will break.” Two days before that, Polish President Andrzej Duda had visited Kiev. To be sure, Zelensky and Duda acted with US approval. In effect, Ukraine's sovereignty over its western regions bordering Poland is eroded. Kiev has also announced plans to grant special legal status to Polish citizens. Plainly put, a de facto “merger” is under way. A reclamation of lost territories in western Ukraine (estimated to be 178000 sq. kms) would make Poland much larger than Germany — exceeding 500,000 sq. kms as against Germany's 357, 588 sq. kms. The geopolitical implications are far too profound to be overstated — to name a few, EU's future, Germany's rise, Europe's autonomy, German-Russian relations, Russia's security. (2) Transcript: Kissinger warning at Davos https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/05/kissinger-these-are-the-main-geopolitical-challenges-facing-the-world-right-now/ Kissinger: These are the main geopolitical challenges facing the world right now Former Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, joined Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum, for a conversation on the most pressing issues facing the world. Kissinger says the conflict in Ukraine can permanently restructure the global order. How the USA and China navigate their relationship in this complicated world will be telling for future generations. When former US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, spoke for the first time at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in 1980 he said that "we are in an age of global-interdependence". This statement was repeated by World Economic Forum Founder and Executive Chairman, Klaus Schwab, in a discussion with the Nobel-prize winning diplomat at Davos 2022. Known for his Realpolitik, Henry Kissinger cemented a global reputation as a pragmatist amidst the Cold War, steering US foreign policy in the 1960s and 1970s. Pioneering the policy of détente, Kissinger sought to reduce tensions with the then-USSR and orchestrated US diplomatic relations with China. Asked about his perspective on the major issues facing the world today, Kissinger emphasized how the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine could reshape the world as we know it: "Parties should be brought to peace talks within the next two months. Ukraine should've been a bridge between Europe and Russia, but now, as the relationships are reshaped, we may enter a space where the dividing line is redrawn and Russia is entirely isolated. We are facing a situation now where Russia could alienate itself completely from Europe and seek a permanent alliance elsewhere. This may lead to Cold War-like diplomatic distances, which will set us back decades. We should strive for long-term peace." In speaking about the rise of China, Kissinger reflected on his experience in negotiating with Beijing: "When we opened diplomatic relationships with China in the 1970s, we did it with a sense that we're starting a permanent relationship. That was a very different country. Today, it is a powerhouse with significant economic and strategic interests. How the US and China conduct their relationship in coming years will depend on the patience and diplomacy of its leaders." Henry Kissinger noted that the potentially adversarial aspect of the US-China relationship should be mitigated and common interests should be pursued and upheld. "The US," he says, "must realize that China's strategic and technical competence has evolved. Diplomatic negotiations must be sensitive, informed and unilaterally strive for peace." Military technologies "We are faced with the reality that modern technologies are putting countries in situations that they've never been in before," said Kissinger. Nuclear powers and new military technologies, without established criteria for limitations, could spell catastrophe for humankind." Full Transcript: Klaus Schwab: [00:00:02] Hello, Dr. Kissinger. Greetings from Geneva- I should say from Davos. Do you hear us? Henry Kissinger: [00:00:13] Yes, I hear you very well. Klaus Schwab: [00:00:15] You know, you have here a great assembly. Everybody is interested in hearing your views. And I don't have to introduce you, Dr. Kissinger. I just would like to mention that I met you when I was at Harvard over 50 years ago. And actually, you came to Davos the first time. It was in (1980), so over 40 years ago. And I looked at your speech, which you gave in 1980, and I just want to quote one or two things. In your speech, you focused and I quote: “It's a constantly changing world.” Does it sound familiar? And you said, and I quote: “The age of global interdependence.” End of quote. And you warned of, I quote, “a delusion of confidence in classic models, a challenge to the system.” And you concluded your speech by saying all of those changes are global and would make ours a period of turmoil, even apart from any specific challenge that we have to face. 1980, and, wow, we are 42 years later. And of course, we are very keen to hear how you assess the situation of today. And I had the pleasure to visit you just some weeks ago. And we have chosen, as I mentioned to you at that time, history at a turning point. We are really at a turning point. And this is not a speech. This is a conversation of, I would say, a young student and an experienced professor. So, my first question to you, Henry, is if you listen to the theme “history at a turning point,” would you describe the new world which may arise after this turning point, which we are living through at this moment? Henry Kissinger: [00:02:59] Let me thank you for letting me return to Davos, because it is such a crucial forum for the exchange of ideas all over the world. But the outcome of this turning point — it's not yet obvious, because there are a number of issues which are still under consideration within the realm of the decision-makers and of course, many evolutions that are going on that will affect the outcome. Let me sketch the issues. The most vivid at the moment is the war in Ukraine, and the outcome of that war, both in the military and political sense, will affect relations between groupings of countries, which I will mention in a minute. And the outcome of any war and the peace settlement, and the nature of that peace settlement — it will determine whether the combatants remain permanent adversaries, or whether it is possible to fit them into an international framework. About eight years ago, when the idea of membership of Ukraine in NATO came up, I wrote an article in which I said that the ideal outcome would be if Ukraine could be constituted as a neutral kind of state, as a bridge between Russia and Europe. Rather than, it's the front line of groupings within Europe. I think that opportunity is now- does not now exist in the same manner, but it could still be conceived as an ultimate objective. In my view, movement towards negotiations and negotiations on peace need to begin in the next two months so that the outcome of the war should be outlined. But before it could create upheaval and tensions that will be ever-harder to overcome, particularly between the eventual relationship of Russia, Georgia and of Ukraine towards Europe. Ideally, the dividing line should return the status quo ante. I believe to join the war beyond Poland would draw- turn it into a war and not about the freedom of Ukraine, which has been undertaken with great cohesion by NATO, but into against Russia itself and so, that seems to me to be the dividing line that it is just impossible to define. It will be difficult for anybody to gauge of that. Modifications of that may occur during the negotiations, which of course, have not yet been established, but which should begin to be the return of the major participants as the war develops, and I have given an outline of a possible military outcome. But would like to keep in mind that any modifications of that could complicate the negotiations in which Ukraine has a right to be a significant participant, but in which one hopes that they match the heroism that they have shown in the war with wisdom for the balance in Europe and in the world at large — a relationship that will develop as a result of this war, between Ukraine — which will be probably the strongest conventional power on the continent — and the rest of Europe will develop over a period of time. But one has to look both at the relationship of Europe to Russia over a longer period and in a manner that is separated from the existing leadership whose status, however, will be affected internally over a period of time by its performance in this in this period. Looked at from a long-term point of view, Russia has been, for 400 years, an essential part of Europe, and European policy over that period of time has been affected, fundamentally, by its European assessment of the role of Russia. Sometimes in an observing way, but on a number of occasions as the guarantor, or the instrument, by which the European balance could be re-established. Current policy should keep in mind the restoration of this role is important to develop, so that Russia is not driven into a permanent alliance with China. But European relations with it are not the only key element of this [unintelligible]. China and United States, we know that in the next years have to come to some definition of how to conduct the long-term relationship of countries, it depends on their strategic capacities, but also on their interpretation of these capacities. In recent years, China and the United States evolved into a relationship that is unique in each side's history. That is that they, from the point of view of strategic potential, they are the greatest threat to each other — in fact, the only military threat that each side needs to deal with continuously. And so the challenge, the period in which I was involved in the creation of this relationship, in which it was thought that a period of permanent collaboration might emerge of the two countries becoming [unintelligible] has been partly jeopardized and for the period probably terminated by the growth in the strategic and technical competence of each other. So on that level, there is an inherent adversarial aspect. The challenge is whether this adversarial aspect can be mitigated and progressively eased by the diplomacy that both sides conduct and it cannot be done unilaterally by one side. So, both sides have to come to the conviction that some easing of the political relationship is essential because they are in a position that has never existed before — plainly, that a conflict with modern technology, conducted in the absence of any preceding arms control negotiations, so they have no established criteria of limitations, will be a catastrophe for mankind. Whatever Their differences are within the context of historical politics, the leaders have an obligation to prevent this and ensure, at a minimum, permanent consultations, serious consultations on the subject, legal gameplays on a permanent basis. And then it's an evolution of this. Of course, there are many unfinished periods in the future of world. The emergence of additional nuclear powers, of which the most urgent is the rise of Iran and the consequent divisions in the Middle East. And as in the period directly affected by the Ukrainian issue, but affected by the balance that will emerge, the rise of countries like India and Brazil and other countries, will have to be integrated into an international system. They seem to me to be the key issues, together with the fact that the Ukraine conflict has produced a rupture in the economic arrangements that have been made in the period before, so that the definition and operation of a global system will have to be reconsidered. It is these challenges I put forward as an analogy, but I believe they must be overcome, if we not going to live in an increasingly confrontational and chaotic world. Klaus Schwab: [00:19:02] Thank you very much, Dr. Kissinger, for this state of the world description. We have, and I know he's not prepared for it, but we have here someone sitting whom I most admire also for his ideas, and he just has also published a very significant book. So, Graham Allison, would you be ready to comment — and we need the microphone — could you be ready to comment and maybe ask also, Dr. Kissinger, a final question. What is prodding in your mind? But first, it would be interesting to have your comments. Graham Allison: [00:19:55] Thank you very much. Henry Kissinger: [00:19:57] I didn't get the name. Graham Allison: [00:20:00] Your oldest student. Klaus Schwab: [00:20:02] Graham Allison. Henry Kissinger: [00:20:06] Oh Graham Allison, yes. Graham Allison: [00:20:13] I think Henry often refers to me as his oldest student and course assistant, and I tell him that's because I've been the slowest learner. So, Henry, you're looking great. Though, Henry was supposed to be having a 99th birthday party tonight in New York, but the circumstances didn't permit. So I can see you're dressed up for the party, in any case and I'm sorry I'm missing you there, but it's good to see you here. Henry, you hear overview, was as always wonderful. And I think Klaus did a good job in reminding us of the 1980 remarks where we can hear echoes. In 1980, though, China hardly figured in the picture the way it does today. So, as you look at the relationship between the US and China, which as you say, is inevitably inherently going to be rivalrous and adversarial, but at the same time, if unmanaged, may and in a catastrophic war. And as we watch what's happening in Taiwan and just to be timely in terms of the news, the comment of President Biden yesterday in Japan about Taiwan — you and I talked about this before — I think that seems to be about the fastest path to a general full scale war between the U.S. and China. So, I wonder how you are thinking about Taiwan in the context of the need for the constraints and rules of the road that you described the necessity for, but that we now see the absence of. Klaus Schwab: [00:22:25] Henry, do you want to respond? Henry Kissinger: [00:22:29] It's been an unexpected pleasure to see Graham appear and to put me a question. He was my student and he is my friend and we have sewn along parallel lines over many decades. I negotiated the understanding on Taiwan at the very beginning of the US-Chinese relationship. There had been hundreds of meetings on the subject between Chinese and American diplomat, and they always ended on the first day because the Chinese demanded the immediate turnover of Taiwan, and we insisted on the continuation of the use of [unintelligible] methods of achieving this objective. So, I will not go through the process of which it was achieved, but my understanding of the agreement has been that the United States would uphold the principle of one China, that we would now exist on a two-China solution, and the Western world was prepared to live with a long period in which this process would work itself out, and in which it was always understood that the United States was opposed [unintelligible] a military solution to that problem. I believe that these principles have enabled Taiwan to develop for 50 years as a democratic system. And I think it is essential that these principles be maintained, and the United States should not by subterfuge or a gradual process, develop something of a two-China solution, but that China will continue to exercise patience that has been exercised up to now. A direct confrontation. Should be avoided, and Taiwan cannot be the core of the negotiations between China and the United States. For the core of the negotiations, it is important that the United States and China discuss principles that affect the adversarial relationship, and that permit at least some scope for cooperative efforts. The Taiwan issue will no disappear, but as the direct subject of confrontation and adversarial conduct it is bound to lead to situation that may mutate into the military field, which is against the world interest and against the long-term interest of China and the United States. These are the causes I address to my friends in the American government, but also to the friends that over the years I have had an opportunity with on the Chinese side. So, it is important to the overall needs of the world for the United States and China to mitigate their adversarial relationship by recognition that, if a World War 1 type situation were to arise, of sliding into a conflict, the consequences will be more dire than they were then. So, how to manage between an existing adversarial relationship and the need for cooperation in the economic sense and [unintelligible] is a big challenge for both governments, and it will be affected [unintelligible] because China will have to re-analyse its relationship with its established- with Russia, because it could not have expected when it was made that it would evolve in the direction that it has. And it will also be important for the United States to go beyond its assessments of adversarial relations and to some concept of a world order in which the United States and China, partly due to the evolution of economies and partly due to the evolution of ideologies, in an ugly confrontation, and to turn it into something that is compatible with world order. Klaus Schwab: [00:30:44] Thank you. Thank you. And we are coming to an end of our session, and it was fascinating to hear your still very visionary perspectives and to hear from you. Thank you very much. I have a very unusual idea. You may forgive for me, but as we have heard also from Graham, Henry is celebrating his 99th birthday this week. So let's say all together: Happy birthday to you Henry. Audience: Happy birthday to you Henry. Klaus Schwab: All the best and thank you. So, we have we have one minute. And I would I would like to use this minute because Graham, you have written this book — keep the microphone Graham — you have written this book, arguing that if you take historical examples, a war between a competition which may end in a war, let's put it in this way, between the US and China is inevitable. May you just in in in some very few sentences share with the audience. Do you still think this case is coming? Graham Allison: [00:32:38] So, basically, I didn't come to speak. I came to listen to Henry. But this is an idea that emerged over some years. Henry uses history to help inform and illuminate the present and the choices and the challenges. In my book The Thucydides Trap, I look at the last 500 years, we find 16 cases in which a rapidly rising power like Athens in classical Greece or Germany at the beginning of the 20th century, challenges a colossal ruling power like Sparta or Great Britain or the US today. So, 12 of those 16 end in war — so war is not inevitable, just it's been the way that things have happened. Several people since I've gotten there have asked me: “Well, so what would Thucydides say now?” since this book was written five years ago, just as Trump become President. And I think he would say both the rising power and the ruling power seem right on script, almost as if each is competing to see which can better exemplify the typical rising power and typical ruling power. So, (Thucydides) is sitting on the edge of his seat, anticipating the greatest war of all time. Klaus Schwab: [00:34:15] If you follow the advice of Henry that would be the- Graham Allison: [00:34:23] The fifth of the four that escaped Thucydides' trap- rather than the thirteen or the twelve that led to catastrophic outcomes. Klaus Schwab: [00:34:34] So Henry, you have given us very valuable advice and thank you again and thank you also Graham. Thank you Henry. We wish you all the best, and this concludes our session. (3) Ukraine risks merging with Poland – ex-president Viktor Yanukovych https://www.rt.com/russia/556220-ukraine-poland-merger-yanukovich/ 27 May, 2022 21:10 Ukraine risks merging with Poland – ex-president The country is facing a “complete destruction” of its sovereignty amid the conflict with Russia, Viktor Yanukovych warned Ukraine is facing a complete loss of its sovereignty and, potentially, a merger with Poland, former President Viktor Yanukovych has warned. The ex-president, who was ousted in the 2014 Maidan coup, released an extensive address on Friday in which he shared his thoughts about the roots of the ongoing turmoil and the potential fate of the country. The current role of Ukraine as an instrument against Russia was outlined by the collective West long before the conflict between Moscow and Kiev broke out in late February, the ex-president believes. “In 2014 already, Ukraine was designated by certain Western countries as a territory from which a total weakening of Russia should begin. Precisely as a territory, and not as an independent state, not as people wishing to live in peace with all its neighbors, not excluding Russia,” Yanukovych stated. READ MORE: Ukraine to grant special legal status to Polish nationals The current conflict may bring fatal consequences for the country, he went on. Ukraine risks not only losing vast territories “in its south and east” but also a “complete destruction” of its sovereignty, Yanukovych believes. The threat stems not only from the military conflict itself but also the efforts of the Ukrainian authorities to cozy up to the country's western neighbor Poland. Earlier this month, Polish President Andrzej Duda and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky expressed hopes that the two countries would “no longer have a border” between them, while Kiev announced plans to grant special legal status to Polish citizens. The strengthening ties will not bring Ukraine's purported “European dream” any closer, but rather threatens a “merger” with Poland, Yanukovych warned. The ongoing situational rapprochement with Poland threatens a situation where Ukraine may be forced to de-facto merge with it. Russia attacked the neighboring state following Ukraine's failure to implement the terms of the Minsk agreements, first signed in 2014, and Moscow's eventual recognition of the Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk. The German- and French-brokered protocols were designed to give the breakaway regions special status within the Ukrainian state. The Kremlin has since demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join the US-led NATO military bloc. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked and has denied claims it was planning to retake the two republics by force. (4) Zelensky announces “historic” joint customs control on border with Poland https://notesfrompoland.com/2022/05/24/zelensky-announces-historic-joint-customs-control-on-border-with-poland/ MAY 24, 2022 Joint customs control will be introduced on Ukraine's border with Poland in an effort to speed up procedures and begin integration with EU markets, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced on Sunday. Earlier his Polish counterpart Andrzej Duda became the first foreign head of state to speak in the Ukrainian parliament since the outbreak of the war. “We are introducing joint customs controls with Poland,” said Zelensky in a speech published online, quoted by the Rzeczpospolita daily. “This will significantly speed up procedures at the border. It will also remove most of the corruption risks. But it is also the beginning of our integration into the common customs space of the European Union. This is a truly historic process,” said Zelensky. The issue of waiting times at the border was a point of contention between the countries prior to the Russian invasion, with Ukraine preparing to sue the European Union over Poland's refusal to increase the number of freight permits. Following the outbreak of war, however, Ukraine and Poland resolved to conclude a bilateral agreement on joint border and customs control as soon as possible, said Zelensky, as reported by the Ukrinform news agency. The joint customs procedure will reduce registration and queuing times significantly, said Ukraine's infrastructure minister Oleksandr Kubakov. The minister also expressed hope that the successful experience of such cooperation can be extended to checkpoints with other EU neighbours. “Our goal is to fully liberalise truck transport with the EU,” said Kubakov. “We have already succeeded in partially liberalising freight transport, and I am particularly grateful to Poland for allowing lorries carrying fuel to Ukraine to pass through without permits.” Kubakov added that the countries are working to establish a joint railway company to increase the export potential of the Ukrainian economy. Joint border and customs controls are already taking place at four border crossing points on the Ukrainian-Polish border, reports Ukrinform. Poland's President @AndrzejDuda visited Kyiv today, where he met with @ZelenskyyUa and spoke to the Ukrainian parliament. MP @grishchukroma reported that Russian missiles were fired at Kyiv during the speech and deputies had to take shelter pic.twitter.com/AZ7Cbp9m7t Clearance time for lorries had been getting longer in recent years due to the poor permeability of the border crossings, reports Rzeczpospolita. Some drivers were having to wait up to several days to cross. In 2021 trade between the two countries exceeded €48 billion, of which Polish exports accounted for €29 billion, according to Statistics Poland (GUS), a state agency. During Duda's visit to Kyiv on Sunday, he and his Ukrainian counterpart also discussed the issues of defence support for Ukraine and tightening sanctions against Russia, reports Ukrinform. Zelensky said that relations between the country are “finally completely free of quarrels and the legacy of old conflicts”, reports Rzeczpospolita. “I would like the brotherhood between Ukrainians and Poles to last forever…As I said today before parliamentarians, our unity of Ukrainians and Poles is a constant that no one will break.” (5) WaPo: Ukrainian volunteer fighters in the east feel abandoned https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/05/26/ukraine-frontline-russia-military-severodonetsk/ Ukrainian volunteer fighters in the east feel abandoned By Sudarsan Raghavan Updated May 26, 2022 at 5:38 p.m. EDT Published May 26, 2022 at 2:46 p.m. EDT DRUZHKIVKA, Ukraine — Stuck in their trenches, the Ukrainian volunteers lived off a potato per day as Russian forces pounded them with artillery and Grad rockets on a key eastern front line. Outnumbered, untrained and clutching only light weapons, the men prayed for the barrage to end — and for their own tanks to stop targeting the Russians. “They [Russians] already know where we are, and when the Ukrainian tank shoots from our side it gives away our position,” said Serhi Lapko, their company commander, recalling the recent battle. “And they start firing back with everything — Grads, mortars. “And you just pray to survive.” Ukrainian leaders have projected and nurtured a public image of military invulnerability — of their volunteer and professional forces triumphantly standing up to the Russian onslaught. Videos of assaults on Russian tanks or positions are posted daily on social media. Artists are creating patriotic posters, billboards and T-shirts. The postal service even released stamps commemorating the sinking of a Russian warship in the Black Sea. Ukrainian forces have succeeded in thwarting Russian efforts to seize Kyiv and Kharkiv and have scored battlefield victories in the east. But the experience of Lapko and his group of volunteers offers a rare and more realistic portrait of the conflict and Ukraine's struggle to halt the Russian advance in parts of Donbas. Ukraine, like Russia, has provided scant information about deaths, injuries or losses of military equipment. But after three months of war, this company of 120 men is down to 54 because of deaths, injuries and desertions. The volunteers were civilians before Russia invaded on Feb. 24, and they never expected to be dispatched to one of the most dangerous front lines in eastern Ukraine. They quickly found themselves in the crosshairs of war, feeling abandoned by their military superiors and struggling to survive. “Our command takes no responsibility,” Lapko said. “They only take credit for our achievements. They give us no support.” When they could take it no longer, Lapko and his top lieutenant, Vitaliy Khrus, retreated with members of their company this week to a hotel away from the front. There, both men spoke to The Washington Post on the record, knowing they could face a court-martial and time in military prison. “If I speak for myself, I'm not a battlefield commander,” he added. “But the guys will stand by me, and I will stand by them till the end.” The volunteers' battalion commander, Ihor Kisileichuk, did not respond to calls or written questions from The Post in time for publication, but he sent a terse message late Thursday saying: “Without this commander, the unit protects our land,” in an apparent reference to Lapko. A Ukrainian military spokesman declined immediate comment, saying it would take “days” to provide a response. “War breaks people down,” said Serhiy Haidai, head of the regional war administration in Luhansk province, acknowledging many volunteers were not properly trained because Ukrainian authorities did not expect Russia to invade. But he maintained that all soldiers are taken care of: “They have enough medical supplies and food. The only thing is there are people that aren't ready to fight.” But Lapko and Khrus's concerns were echoed recently by a platoon of the 115th Brigade 3rd Battalion, based nearby in the besieged city of Severodonetsk. In a video uploaded to Telegram on May 24, and confirmed as authentic by an aide to Haidai, volunteers said they will no longer fight because they lacked proper weapons, rear support and military leadership. “We are being sent to certain death,” said a volunteer, reading from a prepared script, adding that a similar video was filmed by members of the 115th Brigade 1st Battalion. “We are not alone like this, we are many.” In an undated video, Ukrainian soldiers in the Donbas region made a plea for “proper protection” and said they have been waiting for weeks for reinforcements. (Video: 115th Brigade, 3rd Battalion) Ukraine's military rebutted the volunteers' claims in their own video posted online, saying the “deserters” had everything they needed to fight: “They thought they came for a vacation,” one service member said. “That's why they left their positions.” Hours after The Post interviewed Lapko and Khrus, members of Ukraine's military security service arrived at their hotel and detained some of their men, accusing them of desertion. The men contend that they were the ones who were deserted. Waiting to die Before the invasion, Lapko was a driller of oil and gas wells. Khrus bought and sold power tools. Both lived in the western city of Uzhhorod and joined the territorial defense forces, a civilian militia that sprang up after the invasion. Lapko, built like a wrestler, was made a company commander in the 5th Separate Rifle Battalion, in charge of 120 men. The similarly burly Khrus became a platoon commander under Lapko. All of their comrades were from western Ukraine. They were handed AK-47 rifles and given training that lasted less than a half-hour. “We shot 30 bullets and then they said, ‘You can't get more; too expensive,' ” Lapko said. They were given orders to head to the western city of Lviv. When they got there, they were ordered to go south and then east into Luhansk province in Donbas, portions of which were already under the control of Moscow-backed separatists and are now occupied by Russian forces. A couple dozen of his men refused to fight, Lapko said, and they were imprisoned. The ones who stayed were based in the town of Lysychansk. From there, they were dispatched to Toshkivka, a front-line village bordering the separatist areas where the Russian forces were trying to advance. They were surprised when they got the orders. “When we were coming here, we were told that we were going to be in the third line on defense,” Lapko said. “Instead, we came to the zero line, the front line. We didn't know where we were going.” The area has become a focal point of the war, as Moscow concentrates its military might on capturing the region. The city of Severodonetsk, near Lysychansk, is surrounded on three sides by Russian forces. Over the weekend, they destroyed one of three bridges into the city, and they are constantly shelling the other two. Ukrainian troops inside Severodonetsk are fighting to prevent the Russians from completely encircling the city. That's also the mission of Lapko's men. If Toshkivka falls, the Russians can advance north toward Lysychansk and completely surround Severodonetsk. That would also allow them to go after larger cities in the region. When the volunteers first arrived, their rotations in and out of Toshkivka lasted three or four days. As the war intensified, they stayed for a week minimum, sometimes two. “Food gets delivered every day except for when there are shellings or the situation is bad,” Khrus said. And in recent weeks, he said, the situation has gotten much worse. When their supply chains were cut off for two days by the bombardment, the men were forced to make do with a potato a day. They spend most days and nights in trenches dug into the forest on the edges of Toshkivka or inside the basements of abandoned houses. “They have no water, nothing there,” Lapko said. “Only water that I bring them every other day.” It's a miracle the Russians haven't pushed through their defensive line in Toshkivka, Khrus said as Lapko nodded. Besides their rifles and hand grenades, the only weapons they were given were a handful of rocket-propelled grenades to counter the well-equipped Russian forces. And no one showed Lapko's men how to use the RPGs. “We had no proper training,” Lapko said. “It's around four RPGs for 15 men,” Khrus said, shaking his head. The Russians, he said, are deploying tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, Grad rockets and other forms of artillery — when they try to penetrate the forest with ground troops or infantry vehicles, they can easily get close enough “to kill.” “The situation is controllable but difficult,” Khrus said. “And when the heavy weapons are against us, we don't have anything to work with. We are helpless.” Behind their positions, Ukrainian forces have tanks, artillery and mortars to back Lapko's men and other units along the front. But when the tanks or mortars are fired, the Russians respond with Grad rockets, often in areas where Lapko's men are taking cover. In some cases, his troops have found themselves with no artillery support. This is, in part, because Lapko has not been provided a radio, he said. So there's no contact with his superiors in Lysychansk, preventing him from calling for help. The men accuse the Russians of using phosphorous bombs, incendiary weapons that are banned by international law if used against civilians. “It explodes at 30 to 50 meters high and goes down slowly and burns everything,” Khrus said. “Do you know what we have against phosphorous?” Lapko asked. “A glass of water, a piece of cloth to cover your mouth with!” Both Lapko and Khrus expect to die at the front. That is why Lapko carries a pistol. “It's just a toy against them, but I have it so that if they take me I will shoot myself,” he said. Survival Despite the hardships, his men have fought courageously, Lapko said. Pointing at Khrus, he declared: “This guy here is a legend, a hero.” Khrus and his platoon, his commander said, have killed more than 50 Russian soldiers in close-up battles. In a recent clash, he said, his men attacked two Russian armored vehicles carrying about 30 soldiers, ambushing them with grenades and guns. “Their mistake was not to come behind us,” Lapko said. “If they would have done that, I wouldn't be talking to you here now.” Lapko has recommended 12 of his men for medals of valor, including two posthumously. The war has taken a heavy toll on his company — as well as on other Ukrainian forces in the area. Two of his men were killed, among 20 fatalities in the battalion as a whole, and “many are wounded and in recovery now,” he said. Then there are those who are traumatized and have not returned. “Many got shell shock. I don't know how to count them,” Lapko said. The casualties here are largely kept secret to protect morale among troops and the general public. “On Ukrainian TV we see that there are no losses,” Lapko said. “There's no truth.” Most deaths, he added, were because injured soldiers were not evacuated quickly enough, often waiting as long as 12 hours for transport to a military hospital in Lysychansk, 15 miles away. Sometimes, the men have to carry an injured soldier on a stretcher as far as two miles on foot to find a vehicle, Lapko said. Two vehicles assigned to his company never arrived, he said, and are being used instead by people at military headquarters. “If I had a car and was told that my comrade is wounded somewhere, I'd come anytime and get him,” said Lapko, who used his own beat-up car to travel from Lysychansk to the hotel. “But I don't have the necessary transport to get there.” Retreat Lapko and his men have grown increasingly frustrated and disillusioned with their superiors. His request for the awards has not been approved. His battalion commander demanded that he send 20 of his soldiers to another front line, which meant that he couldn't rotate his men out from Toshkivka. He refused the order. The final affront arrived last week when he arrived at military headquarters in Lysychansk after two weeks in Toshkivka. His battalion commander and team had moved to another town without informing him, he said, taking food, water and other supplies. “They left us with no explanation,” Lapko said. “I think we were sent here to close a gap and no one cares if we live or die.” So he, Khrus and several members of their company drove the 60 miles to Druzhkivka to stay in a hotel for a few days. “My guys wanted to wash themselves for the first time in a month,” Lapko said. “You know, hygiene! We don't have it. We sleep in basements, on mattresses with rats running around.” He and his men insisted that they want to return to the front. “We're ready to fight and we will keep on fighting,” Lapko said. “We will protect every meter of our country — but with adequate commandments and without unrealistic orders. I took an oath of allegiance to the Ukrainian people. We're protecting Ukraine and we won't let anyone in as long as we're alive.” But on Monday, Ukraine's military security services arrived at the hotel and took Khrus and other members of his platoon to a detention center for two days, accusing them of desertion. Lapko was stripped of his command, according to an order reviewed by The Post. He is being held at the base in Lysychansk, his future uncertain. Reached by phone Wednesday, he said two more of his men had been wounded on the front line. Yevhen Semekhin contributed to this report. Poster Comment: Kissinger said a decade ago Ukraine should have been neutral. The Ukrainians have the worst imaginable military leadership. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Horse (#0)
How long, O Lord?
Poland annexing western Ukraine that it used to own between WW1 & 2.... Russia has been an integral part of Europe for 400 years.... Reading this, it just seems apparent... Things just don't change. The geopolitical forces decade after decade, century after century, have always shuffled and always will shuffle, kinda like a lava lamp. Borders will always shift, wars will break out, and it's a never ending story of cycles of cause and effect. I guess the only endgame would be a nuclear war, but even that would just set us back a few hundred years. Geopolitical fluidity would continue to churn.
I don't recollect that from my Catechism lessons.
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||