[ROCKMAN]

"I doubt any of the $350 million will ever be paid by Ukraine." The bill passed doesn't approve giving the Ukraine $350 million to buy that "military hardware"...just gives the POTUS authority to approve the transfer. Doesn't say anything about who's going to pay for it. As far as being a "drop in the bucket" I still go back to my point: the Ukraine has many $BILLIONS at its disposal to spend as it chooses. If the $350 million in military hardware is critical to them they have more than enough to pay for it. And if it isn't that important to them for their on security why should it be important to the US?

[Keith_McClary]

The Ukraine President was in Australia last week to do a coal deal. We have plenty & our government has swallowed the lies about responsibility for MH17 & is towing the US line of utter hypocrisy regarding Russia & sovereignty over East Ukraine.

I read that OZ is "awash" in coal - a major mine shut down for a month because of low prices.

[Sixstrings]

I guess this is the new Russia thread for a while.

Russia reaches out to Europe's far-right parties

VIENNA (AP) — A Russian loan to France's National Front. Invitations to Moscow for leaders of Austria's Freedom Party. Praise for Vladimir Putin from the head of Britain's anti-European Union party.

As the diplomatic chill over Ukraine deepens, the Kremlin seems keener than ever to enlist Europe's far-right parties in its campaign for influence in the West, seeking new relationships based largely on shared concern over the growing clout of the EU.

...

National Front founder Jean-Marie Le Pen told The Associated Press this month that France and Russia "have a communality of interest." Daughter Marine Le Pen, party president and a strong contender for the French presidency in 2017, envisions a Europe stretching "from the Atlantic to the Urals" — a "pan-European union" that includes Russia and is supported by other right-wing parties.
Nationalist Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban perceives prevailing winds as "blowing from the East" and sees in Russia an ideal political model for his concept of an "illiberal state." The head of Britain's euroskeptic Independence Party, Nigel Farage, has said Putin is the world leader he most admires — "as an operator, but not as a human being."

Russia offers friendship with a world power. Le Pen and other party officials visit Moscow repeatedly, and Russian guests at the party's congress this month included Andrei Isayev, a deputy speaker of the Russian parliament's lower house.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20141213/eu--russia_reaches_out-314f993d1b.html

[SeaGypsy]

The alignment of the right with Putin's Russia is simply about the Islamic immigration invasion encouraged & sponsored by socialist lefty feel good people who are blind to the damage being done to their societies.

[davep]

It's just the neocon wet dream continuing.

This seems like a nice summary http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/12/12/brink-war-economic-collapse-paul-craig-roberts/

[Donetsk]

Sanctions on gazprom if it witholds natgas from NATO.

Looks like that's the key concern. Otherwise why bother, too trivial an issue to waste time on.

Cancerous growth is always a non-trivial concern.

[Donetsk]

Directs the President to impose sanctions under this Act on Gazprom if it is withholding significant natural gas supplies from North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member countries, or further withholds significant natural gas supplies from countries such as Ukraine, Georgia, or Moldova.

Is this in any way legal under international law?

It's up to Gazprom who it chooses to supply gas to.

.

Exactly, and it's up to USA to impose American sanctions on any foreign entity, for any reason. If Gazprom does not like it, it is free to ignore the sanctions.

[Keith_McClary]

Sanctions on gazprom if it witholds natgas from NATO.

Looks like that's the key concern. Otherwise why bother, too trivial an issue to waste time on.

Does that include withholding gas if it's not paid for?

[Keith_McClary]

I guess this is the new Russia thread for a while.

Until someone starts yet another one.

[Sixstrings]

Interesting poll numbers:

Ukrainian Approval of Russia's Leadership Dives Almost 90%

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Any kinship Ukrainians used to feel with Moscow's leadership is gone after Russia's annexation of Ukraine's Crimea region in March. Just 5% of Ukrainians interviewed this fall say they approve of Russia's leadership, down almost 90% from the approval rating of 43% the year before.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/12/15/russias-economy-is-doomed-its-that-simple/

[Withnail]

Directs the President to impose sanctions under this Act on Gazprom if it is withholding significant natural gas supplies from North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member countries, or further withholds significant natural gas supplies from countries such as Ukraine, Georgia, or Moldova.

Is this in any way legal under international law?

It's up to Gazprom who it chooses to supply gas to.

.

Exactly, and it's up to USA to impose American sanctions on any foreign entity, for any reason. If Gazprom does not like it, it is free to ignore the sanctions.

No actually it isn't.

Gazprom has the absolute right to do what it likes with its own property, for example if it gets a better price elsewhere or decides to cease supply due to non payment.

That isnt the same thing as the USG passing laws, e.g., to prevent Gazprom from raising capital on US markets, or laws preventing US companies from trading with Gazprom.

That kind of thing is viewed as a breach of international trade rules unless authorised by the UN.

And it makes a joke of the so called 'free market' ethos of the US, doesnt it? Sounds almost like Communism, forcing people to contine supply of stuff they own.

[Mesuge]

Not so boring end of the year at all!
Thank you for these early xmass presents!

US weapons for failed and bancrupted neo nazis in Ukraine?
Using older examples, this catapults us from early 1930s into late 30s, possibly early 40s stages!

Me fool !, I thought thanks to fraking, there is few more years of calm before the storm. Apparently not.

[Donetsk]

Directs the President to impose sanctions under this Act on Gazprom if it is withholding significant natural gas supplies from North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member countries, or further withholds significant natural gas supplies from countries such as Ukraine, Georgia, or Moldova.

Is this in any way legal under international law?

It's up to Gazprom who it chooses to supply gas to.

.

Exactly, and it's up to USA to impose American sanctions on any foreign entity, for any reason. If Gazprom does not like it, it is free to ignore the sanctions.

No actually it isn't.

Gazprom has the absolute right to do what it likes with its own property, for example if it gets a better price elsewhere or decides to cease supply due to non payment.

That isnt the same thing as the USG passing laws, e.g., to prevent Gazprom from raising capital on US markets, or laws preventing US companies from trading with Gazprom.

.

Yes it is exactly the same thing. As I said Gazprom is free to ignore the sanctions. If there are international trade violations or whatever, Gazprom is welcomed to sue.

[Withnail]

Yes it is exactly the same thing. As I said Gazprom is free to ignore the sanctions. If there are international trade violations or whatever, Gazprom is welcomed to sue.

Well no it's not the same thing if one action is valid under international law and another isn't.

Now get back to Lviv. I'm sure there's a torchlit parade you should be at, or something.

[radon1]

Sanctions on gazprom if it witholds natgas from NATO.

Looks like that's the key concern. Otherwise why bother, too trivial an issue to waste time on.

Cancerous growth is always a non-trivial concern.

See, the Congress spent time debating a $350m deal. Can you imagine a congressman's rate per hour? Sounds like they wasted time on something worth about $1m per congressmen, looks ridiculous, like Russian Duma.

Of course this was not their concern. Their concern was Europe's energy supplies (as article evidenced), and in order to address it they need to be able to station troops in Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia and elsewhere outside NATO's mandate. Because NATO itself does not want to go for it. This is what this was all about. And the deal was cherry on the top.

[Donetsk]

Yes it is exactly the same thing. As I said Gazprom is free to ignore the sanctions. If there are international trade violations or whatever, Gazprom is welcomed to sue.

Well no it's not the same thing if one action is valid under international law and another isn't.

Now get back to Lviv. I'm sure there's a torchlit parade you should be at, or something.

Please do quote international law chapter that say so. The date when it was ratified by US Congress would also be very helpful.
As for Lviv, I wish I could. I heard it's an amazing city. Unfortunately I spent only about an hour there, waiting for a train with my mom. I was a little kid back then, two, may be three years younger than you are now.

[Withnail]

Unfortunately I spent only about an hour there, waiting for a train with my mom. I was a little kid back then, two, may be three years younger than you are now.

Shame it wasn't a train in 1944 heading for the destination you Ukrainians helped to send so many people.

Oh and unilateral sanctions not authorised by the UN Security Council are by definition illegal.

However retaliating againt such illegal sanctions as Russia did to the EU on food imports following EU sanctions, would be legal under the principle of reciprocity.

[soulmater]

Poor, poor Ukrainian devils! Russia suppresses them. USA screw up them. And their most desirable Europe obeys to Germany which dances to American tune. This is what Anonymous movement claims about their Merkel:
https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/?p=21626
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHYCTqB1dD4

[Sixstrings]

See, the Congress spent time debating a $350m deal. Can you imagine a congressman's rate per hour? Sounds like they wasted time on something worth about $1m per congressmen, looks ridiculous, like Russian Duma.

Of course this was not their concern. Their concern was Europe's energy supplies (as article evidenced), and in order to address it they need to be able to station troops in Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia and elsewhere outside NATO's mandate. Because NATO itself does not want to go for it. This is what this was all about. And the deal was cherry on the top.

Actually, radon, they didn't even bother debating it.

Bills are made in the various committees, to start with. First subcommittee then the main committee. Staffers write the bills, and lobbyists have their influence, and think tanks.

The decisions are really made in the committees. Then floor debate / cloak room discussion for the backbenchers. Generally, party whips will be leading their side to vote one way or another.

The Ukraine issue was never contentious, though. If there's anything for a Russian to understand about the Congress is that Russia has just reignited all the old cold war assumptions and legislators are just going to always knee-jerk vote against Russia now. Russia has not offered up any kind of arguments for their side in the international space, so why would anyone think this would be debated in Congress?

Now of course, the Obama admin is the executive branch and they have some different things to worry about and priorities and a liberal bent so they have not been hardline about Ukraine. But Congress is, there was no debate on this bill, Russia is an issue where Republican and Democratic leaders both agree.

My views are actually much more sympathetic and understanding of Russia, and pro Russia, than anyone in the US congress. So that should tell you something there.

In Congress, the debate really is as simple as "Putin is building a totalitarian empire and bullying europe, and now he's threatening us too."

[dissident]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... aza7fnOWEg

Russian "state run" TV channel (Channel 1) discussion involving a Poroshenko bloc Ukrainian politician, Alexey Goncharenko, other Ukrainians and also a NATO official from Poland.

Putin is being bashed up and down, in and out and side to side. The whole NATO narrative on Ukraine is being drilled into the minds of the Russian "slaves" at full pressure.

Hmmm. There are no examples of such a debate on any NATO TV channel, private or public. All that the "free" NATO citizens hear is the NATO narrative. Any Russian response is basically censored, at best it is presented with lots of spin and forced contextualizing to make sure that the media consumer does not get confused.