The Black Sea Straits: Turkey balances between the US and Russia
By Alexandr Svaranc – New Eastern Outlook – 22.02.2024
The territory of modern Turkey has economic-geographical and military-strategic advantages due to its control over the Black Sea Straits of Bosporus and Dardanelles. Control of the Black Sea Straits has always been strategically important to the great powers in world geopolitics and trade.
Great Britain and Russia often clashed over the right to control the Straits. In August 1914, German ships, including the cruiser Goeben and light cruiser Breslau, attacked Russian ports after passing through the Black Sea Straits. This led to the Ottoman Empire joining World War I on the side of Germany against Russia. One of the tasks of the Nazi German Ambassador to Ankara, Franz von Papen, in the late 1930s was to obtain Turkish consent for the passage of German ships through the Straits to the Black Sea to participate in the war against the USSR. Stalin later described Turkey’s policy during World War II as “hostile neutrality.”
In the 19th century, Russia’s successful wars against the Ottoman Empire enabled Russian control over the Black Sea Straits. However, Emperor Nicholas I of Russia, for some reason, decided to let in Britain and France in resolving the fate of the regime of shipping in the Black Sea Straits, while this issue could have become a subject of relations between solely Russia and Ottoman Turkey.
As a result, on July 3, 1841, the Straits Convention was signed in London, with the consent of the Russian Tsar, between Turkey, on the one hand, and Russia, Great Britain, Austria, Prussia, and France, on the other. It stipulated that as long as Turkey was not at war, the Straits would be closed to military ships of any nation. During the war, Turkey was granted the right to let ships through the Straits belonging to states with which it wished to reach an agreement. The London Straits Convention in fact buried the decisions of the Russian-Turkish Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi of 1833, according to the secret articles of which Turkey undertook not to allow warships of any European countries to enter the Black Sea. Russia’s political and military positions have been significantly strengthened by the latter.
Following the results of the First World War, the Versailles Conference of the victorious countries again returned to the topic of the Black Sea straits, which continued with long negotiations, sharp discussions and ended with the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne on July 24, 1923, based on a project of Great Britain. The representatives of the Soviet delegation were actually blocked, and the head of the Russian delegation, Vatslav Vorovsky, was not even officially informed about the resumption of the conference and was not allowed to take part in the negotiations (on May 10, 1923, Vorovsky was assassinated in Lausanne by Russian White émigré named Maurice Conradi).
The Lausanne Treaty was signed between Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and Turkey. The USSR did not ratify the convention because its terms violated legal rights and did not guarantee the security of Black Sea countries. In particular, this convention provided for the demilitarization of the Straits Zone, with the Straits themselves coming under the control of a special international commission. In other words, the right to station military units near the straits was taken away from Turkey, through whose territory the straits passed. Simultaneously, all commercial and military vessels from any country in the world were granted free passage through the Bosporus and Dardanelles, with only minor restrictions. The latter created problems for the Black Sea countries, especially for the main Black Sea powers – Turkey and Russia.
The events of 1936 in Spain, the growth of Fascist militarism in Italy and Germany reopened the issue of the Black Sea Straits. Britain was concerned about losing control over Turkey, its naval bases, and its broad interests in the Mediterranean and the Arab East, including the restoration of the German-Turkish alliance. Therefore, London considered it appropriate to make concessions to Ankara on the issue of changing the regime of the Black Sea Straits and replacing the International Special Commission with Turkish control, including the abolition of Turkey’s demilitarization in the Straits Zone.
Consequently, following months of discussions, a new convention on the Black Sea Straits regime was signed on July 20, 1936, in the Swiss city of Montreux. This convention is seen as a compromise in international practice. In times of peace and war, merchant ships of all nations were granted the right of free passage through the Straits. Warships of non-Black Sea states are restricted in transit through the Bosporus and Dardanelles by class, total tonnage, total number and period of stay in the Black Sea not exceeding three weeks. In the case of Turkey’s taking part in a war, and if Turkey considers itself directly threatened by war, it is given the right to authorize or prohibit the passage of military ships through the Straits. Accordingly, the demilitarization regime was abolished, and Turkey was granted the right to station its military garrisons in the Straits Zone. The USSR’s demands for limitations on the military presence of non-littoral states in the Black Sea were mostly taken into account. London and Paris obtained the right to adjust the ratio of naval forces between Turkey and the USSR in the Black Sea.
Overall, the Montreux Convention can be viewed as a compromise that helped stabilize the situation in the Straits Zone. The Convention has been extended twice for 20 years. It remains in force as of now. The issue of the Black Sea Straits is currently being discussed in international diplomacy. This is especially true in times of crisis, when relations between major Black Sea countries, such as Russia and Turkey, become contentious.
With the start of the Russian Special Military Operations in Ukraine, hostilities have been resumed in the Black Sea basin waters. The Collective West, led by the United States, is attempting to alter the international legal norms that regulate the passage of warships through the Bosporus and Dardanelles.
According to US Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Celeste Wallander, Washington plans to collaborate with Ankara regarding shipping in the Black Sea. The Pentagon spokesperson emphasized the need to create a favorable environment in the region, ensuring that the Black Sea is fully accessible for commercial shipping.
Meanwhile, the United States is attempting to use merchant shipping as a cover to alter the regulations for the passage of non-Black Sea NATO warships through the Dardanelles and Bosporus to the Black Sea. For this purpose, the Black Sea Grain Initiative became a convenient opportunity.
The United States and the United Kingdom assert that Russia’s decision to withdraw from the agreement violates international humanitarian law. They propose the formation of an operational group under the convoy of NATO air and naval forces to transport Ukrainian grain through the Straits to foreign markets.
Retired US Navy Admiral James Stavridis announced in July 2023 that a convoy would be created under the control of the United States or NATO. A year earlier, The Wall Street Journal reported that Joe Biden Administration was considering new rules for the passage and navigation of warships in the Black Sea. The North Atlantic Alliance plans to deploy more military aircraft and ships to the Black Sea, according to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.
In November 2023, US Congressmen Mike Rogers and Mike Turner urged President Joe Biden to deploy US military forces in the Black Sea to provide military support to Ukraine. Meanwhile, Commander Brian Harrington of the US Navy stated that conducting military exercises outside the scope of the Montreux Convention would undermine Russia’s dominance in the Black Sea. Perhaps these appeals and statements are intended more for the Turkish president.
The British and Norwegians have initiated a program to enhance Ukraine’s capabilities in the Black Sea. However, Turkey refused to allow two Sandown-class minehunters which were conditionally transferred by Great Britain to the Ukrainian Navy in June 2021, to pass through the Bosporus. According to Article 19 of the Montreux Convention, Turkey considers the ships of Russia and Ukraine as belonging to belligerent powers and therefore, they are not permitted to pass through the Black Sea Straits. London officials attempted to pressure Ankara, but were unsuccessful.
As for the warships of the US and other extra-regional countries that used to regularly enter the Black Sea using the right of peaceful passage, Turkey has announced within NATO that it will not allow naval exercises or visits for other purposes as long as the conflict continues. Ankara argues that violating the provisions of the Montreux Convention in the current situation will inevitably trigger retaliatory actions by the Russian Navy, leading to a new military escalation. Despite the dissatisfaction of NATO allies with Turkey’s position, Ankara does not intend to change it, showing the firmness and stubbornness typical of Turks.
The Montreux Convention does not allow the unimpeded passage of warships of non-littoral states in the Black Sea. However, after the collapse of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact, NATO gained an advantage in the Black Sea. In other words, prior to 1991, all Black Sea countries except for NATO’s Turkey were members of the Warsaw Pact and allies. Right now, the situation in the Black Sea is reversed. Namely, Russia on the one hand and NATO members Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and the North Atlantic Alliance candidates Georgia and Ukraine on the other.
The US is not a signatory to the Montreux Convention at all and can therefore afford to violate its terms. Every five years since the signing of this convention in 1936, changes to its provisions may be proposed, provided that the initiative is supported by a two-thirds vote of the Montreux signatories. However, currently, all signatory countries except Russia are NATO members, and Japan and Australia are strategic partners or allies of the United States.
In this situation, Turkey’s opinion remains key as it still holds the role of “host of the Straits” under the Montreux Convention and maintains an independent policy. A change in the provisions of the convention would be a change in Turkey’s own status quo in the region. This is obviously not what Ankara wants. Crimea is now under Russian control, which could pose a threat to the same straits.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that the Turkish authorities will not change the rules of entrance in the Black Sea for NATO warships under Pentagon’s pressure. However, Russia cannot rely on Turkey’s guarantees forever, as Ankara has shown a willingness to make sudden political reversals.
The US and Turkey are discussing the issue of closing the Bosporus to Russian warships, according to Iranian journalist Hayal Muadzin. In particular, there is information circulating that the US has offered to cede some areas in northern Syria, apparently Kurdish-populated provinces, to Turkey as a gift to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, in exchange for active cooperation against Russia in the Black Sea.
In January, Turkey ratified Sweden’s NATO status in exchange for the delivery of 40 modernized F-16 fighter jets from the US. Washington is prepared to address the matter of F-16 Block 70 fighter jets for Turkey. Additionally, Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland stated in Ankara that the US is willing to involve Turkey in the production program of fifth-generation F-35 fighter jets and provide them with a Patriot air defense system. This offer is contingent upon Turkey’s refusal to use the Russian S-400 Triumf SAM system. The Americans may be willing to provide soft loans to support the struggling Turkish economy, but only if Turkey refrains from actively cooperating with Russia in trade and economic matters and strictly adheres to the sanctions regime.
It is evident that Turkey faces numerous temptations. However, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is aware that excessive improvisation towards Russia could jeopardize Turkey’s Great Turan project and its access to Azerbaijan and Turkic countries in Central Asia through the Zangezur corridor. For the time being, therefore, Ankara is trying to keep the “Russian side” of the fence. Turkey refuses to revise the provisions of the Montreux Convention in exchange for the “Swedish case.”
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan confirmed that Ankara will continue to use the Montreux convention and stated that it is not up for debate. With the outbreak of the crisis in Ukraine, Turkey exercised its powers under the Montreux Convention and prohibited the passage of warships through the Black Sea Straits. The Turkish Defense Ministry aims to prevent further escalation of military tensions in the Black Sea basin, especially in the Straits area. The Straits pose not only an economic issue for Turkey, but also a security concern. Ankara has the right to charge for the passage of ships through the Bosporus and Dardanelles, which covers expenses for lighthouses, evacuation, and medical care.
In the rapidly evolving situation of the Ukrainian conflict, it is crucial for the Turks to maintain their key positions. There is a domestic political consensus on this issue: the provisions of the Straits Convention must remain unchanged. Turkey’s accession to Western sanctions against Russia is inadmissible; otherwise, Turkey will lose the opportunity to play a mediating role.
Russia tears up Soviet-era fishing agreement with UK
RT | February 21, 2024
British fishermen will be banned from operating in the Barents Sea, one of the world’s largest fisheries for cod and haddock, under new legislation passed by the lower house of Russia’s parliament, the State Duma, on Wednesday.
The bill, which rescinds an agreement signed between the governments of the USSR, the UK, and Northern Ireland in 1956, was passed in its third reading.
The so-called Fisheries Agreement had allowed British ships to fish in the Barents Sea off the north coast of the Kola Peninsula. It was initially signed for a period of five years and automatically renewed every five years since neither party ever withdrew from the agreement.
“The agreement was unfortunately one-sided giving the authority and right to fish only to our partners at the time,” Deputy Agriculture Minister Maksim Uvaidov said, clarifying the details of the treaty. He added that the agreement didn’t provide Soviet fishermen with similar rights.
Taking into account the UK’s decision to strip Russia of ‘most favored nation’ status in 2022, which led to a 35% tariff hike on Russian goods, Moscow says that ending the Soviet-era agreement “will not cause serious foreign policy or economic consequences” for the country.
Commenting on the legislation, Duma Chairman Vyacheslav Volodin said that by tearing up the agreement Russia was returning to its own possession the fish that the UK had been consuming for decades.
“He [President Vladimir Putin] returned our fish to us, because the English, shameless, had been eating it for 68 years. They have imposed sanctions on us, while they themselves make up 40% of their diet, their fish menu, from our cod. Let them now lose some weight,” Volodin said.
A Sky News report from last year claimed that up to 40% of the cod and haddock consumed in the UK comes from Russia.
Tucker Carlson Says Boris Johnson Wants $1Mln to Discuss Ukraine Conflict
Sputnik – 21.02.2024
WASHINGTON – US journalist Tucker Carlson said that former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson wants $1 million from him to talk about the Ukraine conflict in the wake of Carlson’s recent interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“It gets out that we’re doing it [interviewing Putin], and I’m immediately denounced by this guy called Boris Johnson … So I put in a request for an interview with Boris Johnson,” Carlson said in an interview with TheBlaze. “Finally, one of his advisers gets back to me and says, ‘He will talk to you, but it’s going to cost you a million dollars.’ He wants a million dollars.”
Johnson’s adviser said the former prime minister would be willing to explain his position on Ukraine for the six-figure fee, Carlson said.
In November 2023, Ukraine’s former chief negotiator with Russia, David Arakhamia, said Johnson talked Kiev out of signing an agreement with Moscow to end the conflict in spring 2022. Johnson has previously denied the accusations.
Johnson could not have traveled to Ukraine without consulting the United States, Putin said earlier this month.
Putin did not request $1 million to participate in an interview, Carlson noted, adding that Johnson is “a lot sleazier” than Putin.
Dutch court denies Russia’s appeal of $50bn Yukos award
RT | February 20, 2024
The Amsterdam Court of Appeal on Tuesday dismissed Russia’s latest legal challenge in the high-profile Yukos case and upheld the enforcement of a $50 billion award to the former shareholders of the now-defunct oil company.
Energy giant Yukos, once owned by ex-oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, collapsed in 2006 after the company failed to pay billions of dollars in back taxes. The latest ruling concerns a decade-long trial at the International Court of Arbitration in The Hague, which, in 2014 ruled that Russia had violated its international obligations by taking steps to bankrupt the massive oil company in the early 2000s. Moscow has insisted that the dispute with the shareholders was outside the jurisdiction of any foreign court.
According to a statement on Tuesday by the Amsterdam court, Russia’s claim that the shareholders had committed fraud during the arbitration proceedings was made too late. It further said that even if the claim had been considered, it would not have changed the verdict on the arbitration award. “The conclusion is that the arbitration awards remain in force,” the statement reads.
Back in 2014, the arbitration tribunal ordered Russia to pay $50 billion in compensation to the former controlling shareholders of Yukos: Hulley Enterprises and Veteran Petroleum based in Cyprus and Yukos Universal based in the Isle of Man. The Dutch Supreme Court later overturned the ruling.
The ex-shareholders, who claim that the Russian government drove the company to bankruptcy for political reasons, later initiated proceedings in several jurisdictions, including the US.
The private company Yukos was formed after a controversial auction of state assets following the fall of the Soviet Union and quickly became one of the world’s most valuable companies.
The founder of the oil and gas giant, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, was once Russia’s richest man. However, he was arrested and charged with fraud in 2003 and was imprisoned until 2013. His claim that his arrest was politically motivated is widely accepted by the Western media.
Moscow denies the charges and says that foreign courts did not consider that national laws governing fraud and other wrongdoing might have been broken. In 2020, Russia’s Constitutional Court ruled that Russia could refuse to pay any settlement imposed by the Dutch judges. The basis for the arbitration is the terms of the Energy Charter Treaty, which Moscow signed but never ratified.
Ukraine used US-made chemical weapons – Russia
RT | February 19, 2024
Washington and Kiev have violated articles of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) as Ukrainian forces have used illegal munitions on the battlefield, Russian Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov has claimed.
The head of Russia’s Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Protection Forces provided several examples of Kiev’s alleged use of banned chemical weapons and non-lethal chemical agents that he said were obtained from the US.
Kirillov claimed that Ukraine used drones to drop US-made gas grenades on December 28, 2023 containing “CS” compound – a chemical classified as a riot-control tool that irritates the eyes and upper respiratory tract, and can cause skin burns, respiratory paralysis and cardiac arrest when used in high concentrations.
He said the delivery of such munitions by the US to Ukraine was a direct violation of the rules of the OPCW, which states that a country must “never, under any circumstances, transfer chemical weapons directly or indirectly to anyone.”
He also reported that, on June 15, 2023, Moscow’s forces were attacked by a drone carrying a container filled with chloropicrin, which is classified as a Schedule 3 compound under the Chemical Weapons Convention and is strictly prohibited – even for law enforcement purposes. The same chemical was also used by Kiev on August 3 and 11, 2023 near the village of Rabotino, according to Kirillov.
The general also provided several examples of Kiev using toxic substances against Russian military personnel, as well as poisoning high-ranking officials such as the head of Russia’s Kherson Region Vladimir Saldo in August 2022.
Kirillov said Russian intelligence believes that Ukraine’s forces, under the guidance of its Western backers, are developing a new military tactic that would use a “chemical belt.” This would involve blowing up containers with hydrocyanic acid and ammonia to prevent an advance by Russian forces.
He added that plans for such a large-scale use of toxic chemicals were evidenced by the fact that Kiev had asked the EU to supply it with hundreds of thousands of antidotes, gas masks and other personal protective equipment in 2024. That’s in addition to 600,000 ampules of organophosphorus antidotes, and 750,000 bottles of drugs for the detoxification of mustard gas, lewisite and hydrocyanic acid derivatives that were supplied by NATO countries in 2023.
“It is obvious that the volumes requested by Ukraine are excessive for a country that does not have chemical weapons,” Kirillov stated.
There has been no response from the OPCW despite all of this evidence being presented to the organization four months ago, the general said, accusing it of being run by Washington as a tool to target its political opponents.
In November, Russia lost its seat on the OPCW Executive Council after failing to get enough votes from other members of the organization. Kirillov said Moscow was effectively “pushed out” of its seat and was replaced by Ukraine, Poland and Lithuania, who he claimed were pursuing an obvious anti-Russia policy.
UAE banks closing Russian accounts – media
RT | February 19, 2024
Several large banks in the United Arab Emirates have begun limiting transactions with Russia and closing the accounts of Russian companies and individuals due to the risk of secondary Western sanctions, the news outlet Vedomosti reported on Monday, citing businessmen working in the UAE.
The sources, whose identities are not disclosed in the article, told Vedomosti that in September first-tier UAE banks, such as First Abu Dhabi Bank, Emirates NBD, and Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank, largely purged their ties to Russia. It thus became virtually impossible to carry out transactions with Russia using these banks. This happened after Russia’s Ak Bars Bank, which used to be the main channel for Russia-Emirati payments, came under US sanctions.
Second-tier institutions have allegedly so far treated Russian companies and individuals more loyally, but have demanded that these clients purchase additional banking services or put extra funds on their accounts.
The sources also complained that it has recently become next to impossible to open a new account with the country’s larger banks. Many applications from Russian residents are returned after the first compliance check.
The sources attributed the problem to sanctions. According to one businessman, his company’s account was closed after it was discovered that one of the products he was importing had appeared on a EU sanctions list. Some also said banks may be wary of a decree signed in December by US President Joe Biden enabling punitive measures against financial institutions outside US and EU jurisdictions that continue to work with Russia. The regulation specifically targets lenders that facilitate transactions related to the Russian military-industrial complex.
According to analysts briefed by the news outlet, it is still possible for Russian residents to run a business successfully in the UAE, but certain criteria must be met. For instance, the business activity itself should not fall under sanctions; the company should not be linked to ‘politically exposed persons’ in Russia such as government officials, top managers of large Russian companies or banks; and it should not deal with products under Western sanctions, especially dual-use goods that could be employed by the military.
A Vedomosti source close to the Kremlin said the government is aware of the problems faced by Russian businesses in the UAE, but doesn’t consider them critical or unsolvable.
Biden offered prime time Russian TV slot
RT | February 18, 2024
Prominent Russian journalist Dmitry Kiselyov has said that he has sent a request to the White House for an interview with US President Joe Biden. He argued that Russian President Vladimir Putin had already set a “worthy example” by addressing the US audience in an interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson.
Kiselyov, who is the head of Russia’s Rossiya Segodnya media group and also hosts the Vesti Nedeli analytical news program, revealed that he had approached the White House on Sunday while speaking on national TV.
In a letter dated February 15 and addressed to White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, the journalist said that Russians would appreciate the opportunity to hear Biden’s take on “how to stabilize the international situation, restore trust, and renew cooperation between the United States and Russia” amid the crisis in ties between the two powers.
Kiselyov went on to deplore that the US and Russia “are now short of opportunities to listen and to hear each other,” adding, however, that Putin “has set a worthy example by agreeing to an interview focused on an American audience.”
As a reciprocal gesture, he added, Rossiya Segodnya is ready to give Biden an “opportunity to reach the widest possible Russian audience,” promising that the interview would be translated into numerous foreign languages and distributed on various platforms.
The White House has yet to respond to the request.
Tucker Carlson released a much-anticipated two-hour interview with the Russian leader earlier this month in which Putin spoke at length about the reasons for the Ukraine conflict. He explained that modern Ukraine is largely an “artificial state” created from the territories of other countries.
Putin also maintained that the first seeds of the conflict were sown when NATO opened its doors to Ukraine in 2008 despite Russia repeatedly voicing concerns about the bloc’s expansion.
The crisis itself, he noted, started not in 2022 when Russia launched its military campaign, but rather in 2014 when the new Ukrainian government, which came to power as a result of a Western-backed coup, attempted to crack down on those who disagreed with its policies.
US-UK attacks in Yemen ‘illegal’ – Russian security chief
RT | February 16, 2024
The US-led strikes against targets in Yemen are illegitimate and have no justification under the UN Charter, Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev said on Friday at a meeting of security officials from regional powers.
The US and UK, with support from allies, have launched dozens of attacks since January against the Houthis, a Yemeni armed movement. The stated intention was to protect maritime traffic from the militants, who have targeted trade vessels with raids and drone strikes in an attempt to put pressure on Israel.
”Washington and London have unleashed a war with Yemen under the pretext of securing freedom of navigation in the Red Sea. They are trying to drag other nations of the region into it,” Patrushev said. “However, their strikes on the positions of the Houthis are absolutely illegitimate and have nothing to do with the right of self-defense… contrary to what Washington claims.”
The Houthis were a major party in the civil war in Yemen and the primary opponents of the Saudi-led military intervention launched in 2015. They have emerged from the conflicts as the de-facto government of a large portion of the country.
Houthi forces have been targeting passing ships they believe to have ties with Israel in an attempt to enforce a naval blockade of the Jewish state – in retaliation for Israel’s siege of Gaza, which West Jerusalem has conducted with the stated goal of obliterating the Palestinian militant movement Hamas.
Tensions are on the rise globally, Patrushev said, claiming that the core reason for the violence is “the Western intention to hold on to its dominance in world affairs at all cost.”
“People in Washington are convinced that doing so would be easiest amid a global chaos,” he added.
Patrushev delivered the report to his counterparts from China, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan in the Kyrgyz capital, Bishkek. The event’s main focus was on the situation in Afghanistan.
The Vladimir Putin Interview – Part Two
By William Schryver – imetatronink – February 15, 2024
In the immediate aftermath of Tucker Carlson’s interview of Vladimir Putin, Carlson recorded at least two brief segments during which he gave his impressions of the experience. I was exceedingly surprised that one of his foremost “takeaways” from the interview was that Putin had expressed a desire to enter into negotiations to bring the hostilities in Ukraine to an end; that Putin was, as it were, “angling for an exit” from the war.
This is a gross misinterpretation and misrepresentation of what Putin actually said — and the fact is that Putin, on multiple occasions, reiterated his posture on the question.
Tucker Carlson: Will there be talks? And why haven’t there been talks about resolving the conflict in Ukraine? Peace talks.
Putin’s reply came without hesitation:
Vladimir Putin: There have been. They reached a very high stage of coordination of positions in a complex process, but still they were almost finalized. But after we withdrew our troops from Kiev, as I have already said, the other side (Ukraine) threw away all these agreements and obeyed the instructions of … European countries and the United States to fight Russia to the bitter end.
A brief discussion ensued wherein Carlson suggested that the negotiations must take place between Russia and the United States, rather than between Russia and Ukraine, and he (Carlson) lamented that Putin had not even spoken with US President Joe Biden since the war commenced.
Tucker Carlson: … why don’t you just call Biden and say “let’s work this out”?
Vladimir Putin: What’s there to work out? It’s very simple. I repeat, we have contacts through various agencies. I will tell you what we are saying on this matter and what we are conveying to the US leadership: “If you really want to stop fighting, you need to stop supplying weapons. It will be over within a few weeks. That’s it. And then we can agree on some terms …”
What’s easier? Why would I call him? What should I talk to him about? Or beg him for what? “You’re going to deliver such and such weapons to Ukraine. Oh, I’m afraid, I’m afraid, please don’t.” What is there to talk about?
I don’t know how Putin could have been more clear about the Russian posture at this stage of the war [paraphrasing]: “If the United States desires for the war to end, the solution is simple: STOP FIGHTING US!”
Earlier in the interview, Carlson had asked Putin if Russia had now achieved its aims in the war. Putin explicitly replied in the negative.
What are Russia’s aims in this war? Well, they were explicitly articulated in Putin’s two landmark speeches delivered in February 2022.
In his February 21, 2022 speech, Putin meticulously recounted the relevant history of the region dating back multiple centuries, and focused specifically on the events that followed in the wake of the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
In addition to Putin’s history lesson, he makes particular reference to a detailed proposal Russia delivered to the United States and its NATO allies in mid-December 2021 — a proposal that effectively amounted to a “final warning”; a last-ditch effort to avoid war in Ukraine.
Consider his words carefully, and particularly in light of how Russia has unswervingly adhered to the objectives Putin articulated in his February 24, 2022 speech.
Last December, we handed over to our Western partners a draft treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on security guarantees, as well as a draft agreement on measures to ensure the security of the Russian Federation and NATO member states.
The United States and NATO responded with general statements. There were kernels of rationality in them as well, but they concerned matters of secondary importance and it all looked like an attempt to drag the issue out and to lead the discussion astray.
We responded to this accordingly and pointed out that we were ready to follow the path of negotiations, provided, however, that all issues are considered as a package that includes Russia’s core proposals which contain three key points. First, to prevent further NATO expansion. Second, to have the Alliance refrain from deploying assault weapon systems on Russian borders. And finally, rolling back the bloc’s military capability and infrastructure in Europe to where they were in 1997, when the NATO-Russia Founding Act was signed.
Vladimir Putin, Address by the President of the Russian Federation, February 21, 2022
(emphasis added)
I submit we can confidently assume Putin was as deadly serious on February 21, 2022 as he was on February 24, 2022; that he was not bluffing; that he was resolved to “raise the stakes” commensurate to whatever was required to achieve the objectives he had so carefully articulated.
The Russian objectives, as delineated in February of 2022, were as follows:
- To prevent further NATO expansion.
- To compel the withdrawal of NATO military forces and infrastructure to their 1997 borders.
- To demilitarize Ukraine.
- To denazify Ukraine.
- To restore to mother Russia the portions of the “Russian Nation” that had been previously severed from it as a result of the ill-considered decisions of Russian leadership over the course of the twentieth century.
As the war has continued, Russian territorial objectives have been further defined. In addition to the reassimilation of the Lugansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson regions into Russia, it is now clear that the Russians are determined to reassimilate into the motherland the Kharkov region and all of the regions bordering the Black Sea coast, extending to the Danube River bordering Romania.
I was convinced as early as February 27, 2022 that it would become imperative for Russia to reassimilate at least the territory indicated on the map below:
Indeed, based on numerous repeated statements from various of the foremost Russian government leaders, including President Putin, it is increasingly evident that the imperatives of Russian “strategic depth” will not be satisfied short of reassimilating both the red and orange-shaded regions indicated on this map, and perhaps even the region shaded in yellow:
It is categorically false to believe Russia would be willing to “freeze” the conflict on the current line of contact, or even with the full annexation of the four regions that have already conducted referendums to rejoin Russia.
I submit that Vladimir Putin’s domestic popularity AND the support of his generals correlate closely to the perception that he will not waver from the objectives he set forth in the beginning. Indeed, it has only been the misplaced sense that he might stop short of achieving his stated objectives that has resulted in meaningful criticism arising from his domestic supporters — whether in government, the military, or the general public.
I further submit that it is precisely the burgeoning faith that Putin will resolutely pursue and achieve his stated objectives that has resulted in the unprecedented willingness of China, Iran, India, and other geostrategically important Eurasian and Global South nations to not only openly support Russia in this conflict, but to also, in many instances, openly defy imperial decrees forbidding military and commercial relations with Russia.
I am thoroughly convinced that a large proportion of the support Russia continues to command across the planet is directly correlated to a pervasive perception that the Russians “really meant it” when they solemnly, formally, and explicitly informed the United States and NATO that peace would henceforth be contingent on them “… rolling back the bloc’s military capability and infrastructure in Europe to where they were in 1997, when the NATO-Russia Founding Act was signed.”
Near the end of the interview, Carlson once again returned to the topic of negotiations to end the conflict:
Tucker Carlson: … are you worried that what’s happening in Ukraine could lead to something much larger and much more horrible and how motivated are you just to call the US government and say “let’s come to terms”?
Vladimir Putin: I already said that we did not refuse to talk. We are willing to negotiate. It is the Western side [not willing to negotiate], and Ukraine is obviously a satellite state of the U.S. It is evident. I do not want you to take it as if I am looking for a strong word or an insult, but we both understand what is happening.
Putin then briefly referred to the massive amounts of money and weaponry the NATO nations have pumped into Ukraine, and made the point again that, if there was a desire for the war to end, NATO support for Ukraine must end first.
Tucker Carlson: … that is why I asked about dealing directly with the Biden administration, which is making these decisions, not president Zelensky of Ukraine.
Putin then proceeds to explain to Carlson the situation in terms that ought to have defied any misunderstanding. Indeed, this is arguably the single most important part of the entire interview. Pay close attention to how Putin frames the issue:
Vladimir Putin: Well, if the Zelensky administration in Ukraine refused to negotiate, I assume that they did it under the instruction from Washington. If Washington believes it to be the wrong decision, let it abandon it, let it find a delicate excuse so that no one is insulted, let it come up with a way out. It was not us who made this decision, it was them, so let them go back on it. … They did it so let them correct it themselves. We support this.
And yet, amazingly, the ill-prepared and slow-to-comprehend Tucker Carlson still does not grasp Putin’s meaning:
Tucker Carlson: So, I just want to make sure I am not misunderstanding what you are saying — and I don’t think that I am — I think you are saying you want a negotiated settlement to what’s happening in Ukraine.
Putin visibly sighs at this retort, and patiently attempts again to make Carlson understand. He reminds Carlson of how a tentative peace settlement had been reached in early 2022, but was then torpedoed by the west, who instead persuaded Ukraine to fight on, with the reassurance that NATO would continue to support them “for as long it takes”.
Vladimir Putin: … we prepared a huge document in Istanbul that was initialed by the head of the Ukrainian delegation. He affixed his signature to some of the provisions … [later] he himself said: “We were ready to sign it and the war would have been over long ago, eighteen months ago. However, Prime Minister Johnson came, talked us out of it and we missed that chance.”
Well, you missed it, you made a mistake … Why do we have to bother ourselves and correct somebody else’s mistakes?
I know one can say it is our mistake, it was us who intensified the situation and decided to put an end to the war that started in 2014 in Donbass, as I have already said, by means of weapons. Let me get back further in history, I already told you this, we were just discussing it. Let us go back to 1991 when we were promised that NATO would not be expanded, to 2008 when the doors to NATO opened, to the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine declaring Ukraine a neutral state. Let us go back to the fact that NATO and US military bases started to appear on the territory of Ukraine creating threats for us. Let us go back to the coup d’état in Ukraine in 2014. It is pointless though, isn’t it? We may go back and forth endlessly. But they stopped negotiations. Is it a mistake? Yes. Correct it. We are ready. What else is needed?
Tucker Carlson: Do you think it is too humiliating at this point for NATO to accept Russian control of what was two years ago Ukrainian territory?
Vladimir Putin: I said let them think how to do it with dignity. There are options if there is a will.
Up until now there has been the uproar and screaming about inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia on the battlefield. Now they are apparently coming to realize that it is difficult to achieve, if possible at all. In my opinion, it is impossible by definition. It is never going to happen. It seems to me that now those who are in power in the West have come to realize this as well. If so, if the realization has set in, they have to think what to do next. We are ready for this dialogue.
That both Tucker Carlson and others have failed to correctly interpret Putin’s words is incomprehensible to me. So permit me to paraphrase them in language that is perhaps more understandable to the dimwitted and disingenuous people in the west who continue to misrepresent them:
US Militarizes Space While Using ‘Russia Threat’ as Smokescreen
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 15.02.2024
Mainstream media fuss over groundless accusations of Russia deploying nuclear weapons in space is gaining steam while diverting attention from Washington’s militarization of space, Dmitry Stefanovich, a research fellow at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, told Sputnik.
The mainstream US media claimed on February 14 that there is new intelligence that Russia has developed space-based nuclear weapon capabilities designed to undermine the US satellite network.
The intelligence was reportedly briefed to Congress and even key American allies with some lawmakers insisting that it was “very serious”.
Moscow has rejected the claims as yet another attempt by the US establishment to pass a $60 billion funding package for Ukraine, amid House unwillingness to send good money after bad to the corrupt Kiev regime.
Research fellow at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Dmitry Stefanovich, drew attention to the fact that the mainstream media’s comments are highly contradictory.
“Some say that something has already been deployed [in space], some say that something is planned to be deployed, some are talking about nuclear arms, and some are speculating about nuclear power equipment,” the researcher said, adding that the comments resemble nothing more than an exercise in smoke and mirrors.
On the other hand, one could hardly imagine that Moscow would resort to deploying nuclear arms in space given Moscow’s obligations as a signatory country and, moreover, as a depositary country of the Outer Space Treaty, the expert stressed.
The Outer Space Treaty outlines that “states shall not place nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in outer space in any other manner.” The Treaty was opened for signature by the three “depository governments” – the USSR (with Russia being its legal successor), the UK and the US – in January 1967. It entered into force in October 1967.
What’s more, the use of nuclear weapons in space would destroy spacecraft indiscriminately, knocking out American and Russian satellites alike, as well as those of third countries, Stefanovich pointed out.
“Starting to shoot down satellites all in a row is quite a serious escalation,” warned the researcher.
He likewise pointed out that in the event of a large-scale military confrontation, Moscow has conventional means to disrupt an adversary’s satellite constellations without needing to resort to nuclear arms.
“One can shoot down satellites with missiles,” Stefanovich said. “The S-500 missile defense system is capable of performing such tasks. There is no doubt that satellites in low orbit can be shot down from Earth. These tests were carried out by the Soviet Union, the US, China, and India. (…) One can jam or blind satellites. We know about the Peresvet complex, that it exists, and it presumably allows [Russia] to shield its [military positions] from observation.”
“Plus there are options with orbital interception. That is, there are so-called satellite inspectors that could provide tracking [of enemy spacecraft]; there are robotic arms that can theoretically grab satellites. (…) Plus, of course, returning to non-kinetic scenarios, these are different options using electronic warfare systems, as well as cyber impact systems,” the expert continued.
According to Stefanovich, Russia’s major aim is to prevent the militarization of space, whereas the US openly proclaims a goal of space dominance.
Thus, the US created the Space Force (USSF) in December 2019 – a new branch of the US Armed Forces. While announcing the establishment of the new Pentagon unit in June 2018, former US President Donald Trump specifically underlined the need to “have American dominance in space.”
Meanwhile, the US has itself shown it is willing and able to knock out satellites.
In early 2008, the Pentagon launched Operation Burnt Frost which used a navy-guided missile cruiser to launch an SM-3 missile into space which knocked down a non-functioning National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) satellite and showcased its capabilities in shooting down satellites.
Days before the Pentagon’s strike, China and Russia introduced a draft Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects (PPWT) to the Conference on Disarmament (CD), the world’s permanent multilateral disarmament treaty negotiating body. However, the US dismissed the proposal, dubbing it “a diplomatic ploy by the two nations to gain a military advantage.”
“The militarization of space began, in fact, simultaneously with the beginning of the space age,” Stefanovich said. “Space has always had a military dimension. Now the problem we are trying to solve is to prevent weapons from being placed in space. Russia’s position is that we need a legally binding document to prevent the placement of weapons in space. We need to stop the arms race in outer space.”
“When it comes to the American potential, they have created a space force and a huge satellite constellation. The main threat here is not yet in strike systems, but in surveillance systems, both systems that allow, in fact, reconnaissance activities and target designation on Earth. This is a really serious problem,” the researcher concluded.
Ukraine Attacks Russia’s Belgorod With Vampire MLRS: Six Killed, 17 Wounded, Shopping Mall Damaged
Sputnik – 15.02.2024
At least six people were killed during a Ukrainian missile attack on the Russian city of Belgorod today.
Ukrainian forces carried out the attack using the Czech RM-70 Vampire multiple launch rocket systems, Russia’s Ministry of Defense said in a statement, adding that Russian air defense systems managed to intercept 14 rockets.
“On February 15, 2024, at around 12:30 [local time, 09:30 GMT], an attempt by the Kiev regime to carry out a terrorist attack on targets on the territory of Russia using the RM-70 Vampire multiple launch rocket system was stopped. On-duty air defense systems destroyed 14 rockets over the territory of the Belgorod Region,” the ministry said in a statement.
A shopping mall in Belgorod ended up being damaged as a result of this attack.
The mall building, which housed a grocery store and a pharmacy, sustained serious damage, according to local media reports.
Accorting to preliminary reports cited by local authorities, at least six people (including one child) were killed during this attack, and 17 more (including four children) were injured.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, who branded the attack as “another act of terrorism perpetrated by the Kiev regime,” has announced that Russia is going to have this matter reviewed by the appropriate international organizations, including the UN Security Council.
Featured Video
“IT’S JUST A VITAMIN” (VITAMIN K)
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
8 Top Leaders in Field of Medicine Say Don’t Trust Science
By Fred Burks | WantToKnow
Throughout the pandemic, we were told by the powers that be to trust the science. But science is a process, not a person in whom we can place our faith. This process always produces meaningful data about how the world works, yet correctly interpreting that data isn’t always easy or possible. And for a variety of reasons, official interpretations of scientific data appear broadly untrustworthy. When science is used by powerful interests to support questionable policies, it ceases to be a tool for the betterment of all mankind.
Why do these eight top leaders in the field of medicine say that the science is not to be trusted? … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Canada’s Military Punished Whistleblowers Who Flagged Illegal COVID Speech Monitoring
- Iran blasts CENTCOM’s ‘shameless distortion’ on Minab school massacre
- The San Diego Shooting and the Effort to Silence Criticism of Zionism
- IRGC Navy says more ships transiting Strait of Hormuz under its coordination
- Wrong, Sky News, Human-Caused Climate Change Isn’t to Blame for the Alaskan Megatsunami
- In the UK, the classroom has become ground zero for woke ideology
- Six Russians Jailed in Armenia on Flimsy Espionage Allegations
- Europe’s Irrationality & Inability to Discuss War
- Russia once again denounces Kiev’s crimes against the Orthodox Church
- If Thomas Massie Was President…
- If Americans Knew
- Student protest silencing goes to new extremes on US campuses
- Has Trump torpedoed the ICC’s Gaza probe?
- The Numbers Behind the ‘Sacred Work’ of Cleansing West Bank Palestinians for Future Jewish Villas
- ‘Unprecedented act of savagery’: How Israel’s new law places Palestinians on death row by default
- Israel lobby takes out Thomas Massie in grueling primary
- Israel brutalizes flotilla humanitarian activists; US sanctions them – Daily Update
- ‘Don’t Be Bothered by Their Screams’ Ben-Gvir Posts Video of Police Dragging Detained Gaza Flotilla Activists
- Who on Earth Feels Threatened by a Nun?
- Antisemitism? Really? The 33 Most Absurd Examples Listed in the ADL’s New Database
- Gaza’s water crisis: Families survive on less than 10 liters a day amid Israel’s ongoing genocide
- No Tricks Zone
- Researchers Find Rapid Global Warming Phase At End Of Last Ice Age (Ca.18,000 Years Ago)
- Even The DNA Of Single-Celled Plankton Can Upend Alarmist Arctic Sea Ice Melt Claims
- Scandal: Although Climate Panic Is Canceled By IPCC, Europe’s Policymakers Continue With Their Crushing Policies
- How Once Hardcore Climate Alarmist Lucy Biggers Realized It Was All A Scam, Brainwashing
- German Expert: “No Climate Crisis” …”Warming Generally Better For Humanity”
- New Paleo Research: Modern ‘Climate Change’ Has Had No Apparent Impact On Precipitation Patterns
- 90% Subsidized… Bielefeld Germany’s €7 Million Hydrogen Garbage Truck Fleet Sits Idle
- New Study: Declining Trends In 1980-2023 Tropical Cyclone Frequency, Accumulated Energy
- 46 IPCC Scientists Break Rank, Publicly Challenge Long-Standing Dogmatic Climate Claims
- Another Study Links Warming To Cloud Forcing, Shortwave Radiation, Natural Atmospheric Circulation
Aletho News 