Ucrânia

[EDSON]

O Europeu tem que ser orgulhoso de ser europeu e não de ser submisso aos americanos.

Fiz um comentário estes dias sobre a capacidade alemã para ver se nossos amigos portugueses se indi guinavam contra. Mas não, ninguém reclamou, queria mexer com o brio deles mas nada.

Europa se levante e se liberte dos grilhões da submissão da América.

[Bourne]

China Reacts to the Crimea Referendum
China is trying to avoid being caught in the middle of the West and Russia’s battle over Ukraine.

Fonte: http://thediplomat.com/2014/03/china-re ... eferendum/

The much anticipated referendum in Crimea on whether to become part of Russia took place as scheduled on March 16. According to Crimean leaders, over 96 percent of voters were in favor of seceding from Ukraine. As a result, Crimea’s parliament has formally proposed that the region be admitted to the Russian Federation “as a new subject with the status of a republic.” In response, the U.S. and EU continue to call the referendum illegal, and have moved to implement sanctions on selected Russian and Ukrainian officials.

China, meanwhile, is trying to tread a fine line on the issue. When asked at a press conference if China would recognize Crimea as part of Russia, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei gave a carefully noncommittal response: “China always respects all countries’ sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. The Crimean issue should be resolved politically under a framework of law and order. All parties should exercise restraint and refrain from raising the tension.”

Over the weekend, China abstained from voting on a UN Security Council draft resolution that would have condemned the referendum in Crimea as illegal. Russia, as expected, vetoed the proposal, and many observers took China’s choice to abstain rather than join in a veto as tacit disapproval of Moscow’s actions in the Ukraine. The BBC’s UN correspondent said that Western diplomats “got what they wanted when China abstained.”

Western diplomats did seem to take China’s abstention as a sign of victory. America’s UN ambassador, Samantha Power, described Russia as “isolated, along, and wrong” on the Ukraine issue. She further emphasized that “only one country voted ‘no’” on the resolution, citing this as proof “that the world believes that international borders are more than mere suggestions.” Mark Lyall Grant, the UK’s ambassador to the UN, made similar comments about Russia’s isolation. “Russia alone backs this referendum. Russia alone is prepared to violate international law, disregard the UN Charter, and tear up its bilateral treaties,” he said after the vote. “We trust that Russia will take notice of its isolation.”

For his part, China’s UN Ambassador Liu Jieyi distanced himself from the very idea of voting on such a controversial UN resolution. “The vote on the draft resolution by the Security Council at this juncture will only result in confrontation and further complicate the situation, which is not in conformity with the common interest of both the people of the Ukraine and those of the international community,” Liu said, explaining why China chose to abstain.

Foreign Ministry Spokesman Qin Gang elaborated on this in a special statement issued over the weekend. “China disapproves of confrontation … Under the current circumstances, China calls on all parties to keep calm, exercise restraint and refrain from raising the tension,” Qin said. He added that “no party should take any actions that deteriorate the situation.” The request would apply equally, in China’s mind, to the West’s provocative UN resolution and to Russia’s movement of troops within Ukraine.

Clearly, China is uncomfortable with its position as the “tiebreaker” vote in the battle between Russia and the West—a position where even abstaining from voting is taken as a sign of support for one and disapproval for the other. Liu Jieyi attempted to carve out China’s position as a neutral third party by offering a three-point plan: establishing “an international coordinating mechanism … to explore means to a political settlement,” having all parties refrain from taking escalatory actions, and asking international financial institutions “to explore how to help maintain economic and financial stability in Ukraine.”

Chinese media outlets continued to highlight the West’s culpability in the Ukraine situation, one way to demonstrate that China is decidedly not on the same page as the U.S. and its allies. An op-ed in the Global Times by Yu Bin, a senior fellow at the Shanghai Association of American Studies, argued that the West is hypocritical in expressing its concern for Ukraine’s sovereignty. As with many Chinese articles, Yu placed the blame for the current tensions squarely on the West for supporting the original protests against ousted president Viktor Yanukovych. “Ukraine’s sovereignty, therefore, was raped repeatedly long before Russia’s recent move into Crimea,” Yu concluded. He explained Ukraine’s situation as part of the Western history of interference in the name of “humanitarian intervention, regime change, and nation building.”

Clearly, the Western vision for Ukraine is not an initiative China can get behind. Yet it’s also dangerous for Beijing to go on record as supporting the secession of a piece of territory based on ethnic, cultural or linguistic differences. In fact, according to China Digital Times, China’s propaganda department has explicitly ordered Chinese media outlets not to “connect the [Crimea] story to our own country’s issues with Taiwan, Tibet, or Xinjiang.” Due to these warring concerns, China has little choice but to remain officially neutral, allowing its state-run media to tackle the customary denunciations of the West.

The Global Times noted that the situation is largely a renewal of Cold War tensions, and thus does not directly involve China. However, the article added that the crisis has the potential to reshape China’s external security environment, and thus demands a response from Beijing. The editorial recommended that China “should play a mediating role between the West and Russia and help find opportunities to ease tensions,” a position similar to the one outlined by Liu Jieye’s three-point plan.

In addition, the Global Times also took a more cynical lesson from the situation—that Russia’s military power is its trump card. As a result, the article concluded, “China should speed up its military modernization, and especially develop its long-range nuclear strike capabilities” in order to be ready for potential confrontations with the West in the future. In the end, China’s takeaway from the Ukraine crisis may be simply a reinforcement of an old truism: might equals right.

[P44]

Address by President of the Russian Federation

March 18, 2014, 15:50 The Kremlin, Moscow

Vladimir Putin addressed State Duma deputies, Federation Council members, heads of Russian regions and civil society representatives in the Kremlin.

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN: Federation Council members, State Duma deputies, good afternoon. Representatives of the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol are here among us, citizens of Russia, residents of Crimea and Sevastopol!

Dear friends, we have gathered here today in connection with an issue that is of vital, historic significance to all of us. A referendum was held in Crimea on March 16 in full compliance with democratic procedures and international norms.

More than 82 percent of the electorate took part in the vote. Over 96 percent of them spoke out in favour of reuniting with Russia. These numbers speak for themselves.

To understand the reason behind such a choice it is enough to know the history of Crimea and what Russia and Crimea have always meant for each other.

Everything in Crimea speaks of our shared history and pride. This is the location of ancient Khersones, where Prince Vladimir was baptised. His spiritual feat of adopting Orthodoxy predetermined the overall basis of the culture, civilisation and human values that unite the peoples of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. The graves of Russian soldiers whose bravery brought Crimea into the Russian empire are also in Crimea. This is also Sevastopol – a legendary city with an outstanding history, a fortress that serves as the birthplace of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. Crimea is Balaklava and Kerch, Malakhov Kurgan and Sapun Ridge. Each one of these places is dear to our hearts, symbolising Russian military glory and outstanding valour.

Crimea is a unique blend of different peoples’ cultures and traditions. This makes it similar to Russia as a whole, where not a single ethnic group has been lost over the centuries. Russians and Ukrainians, Crimean Tatars and people of other ethnic groups have lived side by side in Crimea, retaining their own identity, traditions, languages and faith.

Incidentally, the total population of the Crimean Peninsula today is 2.2 million people, of whom almost 1.5 million are Russians, 350,000 are Ukrainians who predominantly consider Russian their native language, and about 290,000-300,000 are Crimean Tatars, who, as the referendum has shown, also lean towards Russia.

True, there was a time when Crimean Tatars were treated unfairly, just as a number of other peoples in the USSR. There is only one thing I can say here: millions of people of various ethnicities suffered during those repressions, and primarily Russians.

Crimean Tatars returned to their homeland. I believe we should make all the necessary political and legislative decisions to finalise the rehabilitation of Crimean Tatars, restore them in their rights and clear their good name.

We have great respect for people of all the ethnic groups living in Crimea. This is their common home, their motherland, and it would be right – I know the local population supports this – for Crimea to have three equal national languages: Russian, Ukrainian and Tatar.

Colleagues,

In people’s hearts and minds, Crimea has always been an inseparable part of Russia. This firm conviction is based on truth and justice and was passed from generation to generation, over time, under any circumstances, despite all the dramatic changes our country went through during the entire 20th century.

After the revolution, the Bolsheviks, for a number of reasons – may God judge them – added large sections of the historical South of Russia to the Republic of Ukraine. This was done with no consideration for the ethnic make-up of the population, and today these areas form the southeast of Ukraine. Then, in 1954, a decision was made to transfer Crimean Region to Ukraine, along with Sevastopol, despite the fact that it was a city of union subordination. This was the personal initiative of the Communist Party head Nikita Khrushchev. What stood behind this decision of his – a desire to win the support of the Ukrainian political establishment or to atone for the mass repressions of the 1930’s in Ukraine – is for historians to figure out.

What matters now is that this decision was made in clear violation of the constitutional norms that were in place even then. The decision was made behind the scenes. Naturally, in a totalitarian state nobody bothered to ask the citizens of Crimea and Sevastopol. They were faced with the fact. People, of course, wondered why all of a sudden Crimea became part of Ukraine. But on the whole – and we must state this clearly, we all know it – this decision was treated as a formality of sorts because the territory was transferred within the boundaries of a single state. Back then, it was impossible to imagine that Ukraine and Russia may split up and become two separate states. However, this has happened.

Unfortunately, what seemed impossible became a reality. The USSR fell apart. Things developed so swiftly that few people realised how truly dramatic those events and their consequences would be. Many people both in Russia and in Ukraine, as well as in other republics hoped that the Commonwealth of Independent States that was created at the time would become the new common form of statehood. They were told that there would be a single currency, a single economic space, joint armed forces; however, all this remained empty promises, while the big country was gone. It was only when Crimea ended up as part of a different country that Russia realised that it was not simply robbed, it was plundered.

At the same time, we have to admit that by launching the sovereignty parade Russia itself aided in the collapse of the Soviet Union. And as this collapse was legalised, everyone forgot about Crimea and Sevastopol ­– the main base of the Black Sea Fleet. Millions of people went to bed in one country and awoke in different ones, overnight becoming ethnic minorities in former Union republics, while the Russian nation became one of the biggest, if not the biggest ethnic group in the world to be divided by borders.

Now, many years later, I heard residents of Crimea say that back in 1991 they were handed over like a sack of potatoes. This is hard to disagree with. And what about the Russian state? What about Russia? It humbly accepted the situation. This country was going through such hard times then that realistically it was incapable of protecting its interests. However, the people could not reconcile themselves to this outrageous historical injustice. All these years, citizens and many public figures came back to this issue, saying that Crimea is historically Russian land and Sevastopol is a Russian city. Yes, we all knew this in our hearts and minds, but we had to proceed from the existing reality and build our good-neighbourly relations with independent Ukraine on a new basis. Meanwhile, our relations with Ukraine, with the fraternal Ukrainian people have always been and will remain of foremost importance for us. (Applause)

Today we can speak about it openly, and I would like to share with you some details of the negotiations that took place in the early 2000s. The then President of Ukraine Mr Kuchma asked me to expedite the process of delimiting the Russian-Ukrainian border. At that time, the process was practically at a standstill. Russia seemed to have recognised Crimea as part of Ukraine, but there were no negotiations on delimiting the borders. Despite the complexity of the situation, I immediately issued instructions to Russian government agencies to speed up their work to document the borders, so that everyone had a clear understanding that by agreeing to delimit the border we admitted de facto and de jure that Crimea was Ukrainian territory, thereby closing the issue.

We accommodated Ukraine not only regarding Crimea, but also on such a complicated matter as the maritime boundary in the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait. What we proceeded from back then was that good relations with Ukraine matter most for us and they should not fall hostage to deadlock territorial disputes. However, we expected Ukraine to remain our good neighbour, we hoped that Russian citizens and Russian speakers in Ukraine, especially its southeast and Crimea, would live in a friendly, democratic and civilised state that would protect their rights in line with the norms of international law.

However, this is not how the situation developed. Time and time again attempts were made to deprive Russians of their historical memory, even of their language and to subject them to forced assimilation. Moreover, Russians, just as other citizens of Ukraine are suffering from the constant political and state crisis that has been rocking the country for over 20 years.



http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/6889

[pt]

É que agora as guerras que eles promovem a mando de Washington ficam longe de suas casas. Daí matar árabes e afins, "raças inferiores", bárbaros ignaros, é totalmente normal e justificável. Mesmo que sejam civis indo ao cinema ou a casamentos, isso é normal. A própria mídia ocidental ignora esses casos, mas joga nas manchetes se um predinho cai em Nova York ou se tem um tiroteio em Los Angeles.

Acho que você não vê a imprensa escrita e as televisões dos países democráticos.

É absolutamente mentira que alguém diga que matar árabes e afins é justificável.
Isso é pura e simplesmente mentira.

Desculpe-me mas não conheço outro adjetivo.
As televisões americanas, dão prioridade às notícias sobre a América.

Em Portugal nós temos televisões brasileiras.

Muitas vezes, a prioridade é dada a assuntos absolutamente macabros e sem qualquer interesse, como as violações de crianças algures no estado de Goiás, ou a prisão de supostos assassinos de um massacre qualquer ninguém sabe onde.

Quem vê os canais internacionais de notícias de Portugal, também vê essencialmente notícias sobre futebol. A questão da Crimeia por exemplo, tem uma fração da cobertura que têm as declarações dos presidentes dos clubes de futebol.
Aos portugueses, importa um XXXXX o que acontece na Russia. Eles não nos podem embargar nada ...

As notícias na comunicação social de um país, que são veiculadas para fora do seu espaço original, são sempre vistas de forma diferente pelos outros.

[EDSON]

para os europeus.

[pt]

O Europeu tem que ser orgulhoso de ser europeu e não de ser submisso aos americanos.

Fiz um comentário estes dias sobre a capacidade alemã para ver se nossos amigos portugueses se indi guinavam contra. Mas não, ninguém reclamou, queria mexer com o brio deles mas nada.

Europa se levante e se liberte dos grilhões da submissão da América.

Isso seria como tentar que um sul americano tivesse orgulho de ser sul americano antes de ter orgulho em ser argentino, brasileiro ou chileno.


A União Europeia é uma comunidade de países criada para evitar que milhões de pessoas passassem fome.
O seu sucesso foi tremendo.
Desuniões que existiam desde a idade média passaram a ser negociaveis num contexto muito diferente.
Além da União Europeia exista a NATO.

A NATO foi criada, porque o império comunista russo, com o fim da guerra em 1945, não enviou os soldados para casa e manteve-os nas fronteiras dos territórios ocupados.
A Russia Comunista foi desde esse momento o inimigo. E eles não faziam cerimonia em demonstrar claramente as suas intenções agressivas.

Os americanos desmobilizaram os seus exércitos e foram embora para casa. Os Europeus tiveram que pedir para eles ficarem.


A relação entre a Europa e a América, resulta de décadas de alianças e cumplicidades.
Ela é uma aliança natural. O próprio nome da aliança deveria dizer tudo:
Aliança Atlântica.
Essa aliança conta hoje com países que não têm contato com o Atlântico, mas a sua visão do mundo é a mesma.

Os exércitos desses países, têm uma capacidade de atuar em conjunto, que não existe em mais nenhum grupo de países do mundo. As normas, as dimensões, os calibres as munições, as táticas, as doutrinas operacionais, são conjuntas.

É por isso que foi possível enviar a NATO para o Afeganistão. Mais ninguém conseguiria juntar tantos países e conseguir atuar em conjunto, reduzindo ao mínimo os problemas de falta de comunicação.

A aliança existe e é extremamente eficiente.

Putin no entanto gostaria muito que a aliança desaparecesse
Sem ela, o império não teria ninguém com força suficiente para se opor.
E lá no fundo, Putin não passa de um cachorro que morde a bota, mas sabe, que tem medo de levar um chute.


Mas mais engraçado que isso, Putin hoje queixa-se de que queria fazer parte da NATO.
... e não o deixara...

[P44]

money makes the world go round...

[EDSON]

O Zeus americano vai levar a Europa pra f*****

[hades767676]

Melhor que a Europa e EUA tem a fazer é se conformar com a perda da Crimeia e conseguir um acordo para que Moscou não anexe outras partes da Ucrânia. Ucrânia esperneia, fala grosso, mas o que faz na prática?! NADA! Para os habitantes da Crimeia será bom, pois a renda per capita russa é praticamente o triplo da ucraniana, sem falar que a Rússia tem uma economia estável e um dívida pública que varia de 6 a 8%, uma das menores do PLANETA!

[pt]

Tenho que retirar o que disse sobre os franceses e os dois Mistral.
A França está a considerar cancelar a venda dos dois navios à Russia ...

[hades767676]

Tenho que retirar o que disse sobre os franceses e os dois Mistral.
A França está a considerar cancelar a venda dos dois navios à Russia ...

Como já havia dito, esse é o sonho dos estaleiros russos, que os franceses cancelem essa compra.

[FOXTROT]

Considerando, que o assunto Crimeia faz parte do passado, devem os ocidentais se preparar para barganhar ou vão perder outras partes da Ucrânia....

Quanto a França e seus barcos, terão $$$$ para devolver aos russos? Ou vão pagar com a Guiana francesa?

Saudações

[LeandroGCard]

A União Europeia é uma comunidade de países criada para evitar que milhões de pessoas passassem fome.
O seu sucesso foi tremendo.

Esta é uma informação nova para mim.

Havia mesmo mais gente passando fome na Europa Ocidental antes da criação da UE do que existe hoje?

Lendo as notícias daqui de baixo do equador a impressão que se tem é bem diferente.


Leandro G. Card

[cabeça de martelo]

Portugal desde que entrou para a CEE até agora perdeu muito, mas ganhou também muito e é por isso que andamos todos divididos, porque há ainda muito Português que lembra-se de como era o país antes da adesão (ex.: a geração dos meus pais e avós) e ninguém quer voltar para trás. Os meus pais têm a 4ª classe e o 7.º ano, eu tenho o 12.º ano e a minha irmã tem um Mestrado. Os meus pais quando queriam ir a um médico especialista tinham que meter-se no carro e viajar durante uma hora, actualmente tenho esses médicos a 5 minutos de casa e vivo na mesma localidade.

Não temos dinheiro, não temos emprego (a minha irmã foi forçada a emigrar para a Noruega), mas temos muita coisa que não tinhamos à 30 anos atrás.

[pt]

A União Europeia é uma comunidade de países criada para evitar que milhões de pessoas passassem fome.
O seu sucesso foi tremendo.

Esta é uma informação nova para mim.

Havia mesmo mais gente passando fome na Europa Ocidental antes da criação da UE do que existe hoje?

Lendo as notícias daqui de baixo do equador a impressão que se tem é bem diferente.


Leandro G. Card

Desculpe, mas você está a falar a sério, ou está a brincar ?

É que se você estivesse a falar a sério isso implicaria que de baixo do equador, ninguém percebeu como ficou a Europa depois da II guerra mundial...

Vários anos depois do fim da guerra, a Alemanha não tinha saído do buraco. A maior parte dos países europeus estava arruinada.
Em Portugal, país que não tinha passado pela guerra, as famílias da classe média recebiam crianças vindas da Alemanha e da Áustria, .
Às vezes ainda há pessoas que vêm a Portugal e que dizem que se lembram de cá estar enquanto crianças. Lembram-se de comer bananas, coisa completamente exótica e cara na Alemanha ou na Áustria.

EU NÃO SEI SE VOCÊ ENTENDEU BEM:
Portugal recebia crianças da Áustria e da Alemanha, especialmente durante o Verão.
A Espanha também recebeu milhares de crianças.


Eu pensava que no Brasil se sabia que a situação ficou tão preta, que foi preciso o Plano Marshall, para tentar fazer descolar as economias europeias e mesmo assim a Alemanha precisou de estimulos adicionais.
Pelo menos, nenhum Brasileiro dos que conheço pessoalmente, alguma vez deu a entender que não sabia de coisas tão simples

No inicio da década de 1950, a Europa continuava completamente dependente da comida que recebia da América, da Argentina, do Canadá e mesmo do Brasil. A industria também estava de rastos.
É por isso que foi criada a CECA em 1950, para o desenvolvimento industrial e depois em 1957 surge o Tratado de Roma.
A famosa politica de subsidios à agricultura, tem origem nessa necessidade de a Europa tentar pelo menos ser independente do ponto de vista alimentar.