The Russian Use A Nuclear Plant As A Base To Avoid Being Attacked
More military drills take place from Russia, Belarus, China and Taiwan in August
History seems to be repeating itself as the ‘superpowers’ declare their position in terms of what they will do in cooperation on an international level, and what they have chosen not to do. We cannot ignore this, as these are the events that are precursors to international wars. From what I can see, people are turning a blind eye to things because they want to enjoy life after Covid-19, and we have become a society that feel less responsible for what others choose to do. That is what happened in the US during the Second World War—there was an air of complacency as the war was thousands of miles away and had nothing to do with Americans, and they all carried on with life as normal. They were making money instead from the war by selling Britain and the allies weapons. That all changed with Pearl Harbor, and we have masses who think the same with Ukraine, in that it is thousands of miles from where they live, so it doesn’t affect them. You can see the neighbouring countries, who are not particularly rich ones offering to help in whatever way they can because it does affect them, plus they know that they might be next on Putin’s hit list.
Most notably, the two authoritarian regimes (China and Russia) have used similar tactics to get what they want under the guise of legitimacy. The military drills that China carried out last week were supposed to have ended on Sunday, but they are continuing. As analysts have stated, such drills are precise and planned, and will have been organised many months ago—they simply used Pelosi’s visit as an excuse to carry them out to send a message to the world.
In response, Taiwan has carried out simulated drills in the event of an attack by China—an event that they have been aware of for decades. This is very similar to Ukraine waiting for Russia to attack to reclaim the land, and in this case Russia succeeded in annexing Crimea, due to the help of a corrupt Ukrainian president and other traitors in the government
.
We have Turkey, who in public are happy to make deals with Russia while being a member of NATO, and Hungary, who is also a NATO member and also a member of the EU spouting rhetoric that opposes migration—a key component of the EU policies. These autocratic regimes pretend to be heading towards democratic policies, but their actions say quite the opposite. The world leaders are afraid of a nuclear war, but appeasing Russia is not the answer, and giving up Ukraine isn’t either. Who would be next? Moldova, Georgia, Poland, Romania or Finland?
With the recent Amnesty International compromised report on Ukrainian troops, it makes you wonder what other organisations are being compromised? This is an open letter from a former Amnesty International official (Bohdan Nahaylo) who has called for the resignation of the Secretary General, Agnes Callamard:
Madam Secretary General, I am writing an open letter to you calling for your immediate resignation. This serves not only to acknowledge your mishandling of the notorious Amnesty International (AI) “report” concerning Ukraine (published on August 4), but to protect your organization’s reputation which you have seriously undermined.
You committed a gross error of judgment in a very delicate situation, but also publicly disgraced yourself with personal comments unbefitting an official in your position.
Your handling of AI’s accusations against the Ukrainian military has been disgraceful and reprehensible. You have stabbed Ukraine in the back while it is fighting for its very survival against Russian invaders, and at the same time you have shot your own organization in the foot by delivering a serious blow to its reputation.
Madam Secretary General, I have every right to address you personally in such a manner and call on you to do the honorable thing and go.
I am not only the current Chief Editor of the Kyiv Post, Ukraine’s oldest English-language newspaper and its respected global voice. I am also a former activist and official of AI in the years when there was no doubt about what it stood for, how it operated, and the accountability of its Secretariat and leadership to its membership and national sections.
As a student, between 1971 and 1977, I was the co-founder of AI groups at the Universities of Leeds and Manitoba, and later the London School of Economics and Political Science.
From 1978 to 1982, I was AI’s Researcher on the USSR, heading its work within the Secretariat in London in defense of prisoners of conscience and human rights in the repressive Soviet domain.
I had the privilege of serving under AI’s legendary Secretary General Martin Ennals, and later his successor Thomas Hammarberg.
In those memorable days it was crystal clear what AI was about and what it’s three principal goals were: defense of prisoners of conscience worldwide; and opposition to both torture and the death penalty.
Today, I no longer know what AI’s mission is, other than it’s seeking to sustain itself and its well-paid staff among the plethora of human rights organizations that have sprung up in the last decades.
What is AI’s specialization and focus today, its niche and specific expertise that brings added value in comparison to others, apart from its reputation as a pioneer in the field and efficacy as a fund raiser?
I have observed the gradual blurring of AI’s classic focus as it has broadened its purview to encompass areas such as extrajudicial and political killings, forced disappearances, population displacement and refugees, armed conflicts and related atrocities, rights of indigenous populations, economic and social injustices stemming from globalization and domestic violence. In short, all possible areas where human right issues are present.
But excuse me, Madame Secretary General – is this what the founders of AI dreamt of? That their clearly defined and targeted initiative would be transformed by their successors into such ambitious pretensions to claiming a universal human rights protection role of the sort mandated to the United Nations (particularly the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights), or on a regional level to the Council of Europe or the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe? That AI would implicitly challenge the International Committee of the Red Cross or the International Criminal Court in assessing human rights abuses in war zones?
That “Amnesty International” would gradually reconstitute itself as the “Be all, and end all” in the human rights domain, and let’s face it, increasingly, become the lucrative “business” it is now?
Or is fund raising the priority now and therefore the importance of being seen to be active on the broadest possible front regardless of AI’s genuine competencies and history?
I don’t know how much you earn Madame Secretary General, but from the last up-to- date figures provided by AI, your predecessor’s salary in 2018 was £145,000 GBP, which was just short of what the UK Prime Minister was earning.
Not bad for an international NGO traditionally funded by private individuals contributing through the collection tins, which also makes it quite understandable why sensationalism is so important to sustain attention and keep the revenues flowing in.
Which brings me to AI’s headline-seeking “report” glibly titled “Ukraine: Ukrainian fighting tactics endanger civilians” on its site. It raises many questions that need answering. Here are a some of the most obvious ones.
Does AI have any specific competence in this sphere related to the situation in the war affected areas in Ukraine? Who were the researchers sent to investigate the situation? Can they vouch for the reliability of the witnesses they spoke to?
Why was the Ukrainian national section of AI ignored in such a delicate operation? Did AI’s investigators cooperate with the UN mission on the ground, the OSCE’s and ICRC’s representatives. And what was the level of their interaction with the Ukrainian authorities who permitted them to undertake such an investigation – did they in fact inform them up front on what the terms of their mission actually was, and what they intended to do with the findings?
Indeed, what was the purpose behind the investigation which produced the report. Why the sensational loud launch it was given which essentially throws a juicy bone to the Russian aggressors? Human Rights Watch and the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine had recently already alluded to the issue in question but far more tactfully and without aggravating their hosts – the Ukrainian authorities, the national AI section and Ukrainian society generally.
Madam Secretary General, I don’t question AI’s right to conduct its own investigations in spheres falling within its recognized competency. I do however challenge how you went about this particular mission, the way your findings were presented, and your contemptuous and dismissive response to critics ranging from your own Ukrainian national section to the top leadership of Ukraine.
In glibly accusing the Ukrainian army of “endangering civilians” because it allegedly “establishes bases and operates weapons systems in populated residential areas,” AI fails to emphasize the following: that the shifting front line in the war zone very often runs through cities, towns and villages, with the Russian invaders employing scorched earth tactics through indiscriminate shelling and missile attacks; and that the Ukrainian authorities have repeatedly urged the local population to evacuate the targeted and exposed areas.
Forcing civilians to leave their homes would no doubt be construed by AI to be a violation of their basic rights.
Regrettably, because of the grave war crimes being committed by Russian aggressors on Ukrainian territory there is no quick fix solution as implied by AI to reduce the suffering of the civilian population other than to force Russia to stop its invasion, occupation, and destruction of Ukraine and its people.
Yet by issuing your report in the form you chose, AI effectively suggested a moral equivalence between the behavior of the Russian invaders and Ukraine’s defenders; in turn amplifying the very anti-Ukrainian narrative that Russia has been promoting since 2014 when it invaded eastern Ukraine.
No wonder that in Russia where AI has long been regarded as a hostile intruder, the report has received widespread coverage in the officially controlled media and depicted as a vindication of Russia’s fake news accusations against Ukraine.
Madam Secretary General – all this is very serious. You have bungled your mission to Ukraine and its report, alienating both your own exemplary national section of AI as well as the Ukrainian authorities. You also arrogantly dismissed criticism of your actions in an insensitive and offensive manner on your personal Twitter account.
Therefore, in order to protect the reputation of AI, the only honorable thing to do is to resign and allow a suitable successor to step in and restore the good name and sense of direction of a human rights organization that deserves better.
If you are not persuaded that this what is needed, then let me also appeal to the International Board and national sections of AI to do the right thing and dismiss you.
I do not think that negotiations after all these deaths will work, and Ukraine will not cede land, nor should they. They owe it to all those who died to protect the country, and Putin doesn’t negotiate, he just takes.
No one wants war, especially a nuclear war but this has always been about power and that is all that Putin craves. With the AI report and Russia controlling social media and censoring information, it has brainwashed the Russians and other countries that support them. The only solution is the removal of Russia form Ukraine, and for the country to be removed from the UN Security Council as a permanent member. Currently, there are no ‘rules’ or guidelines on how to do that effectively, so the UN need to figure out a way to do this (and not upset Russia, or provoke a nuclear war). The issue here is that the UN is the ‘boss’ and should be able to make the rules as to who stays or goes. They are being held hostage by fear, so when you fear a state, you cannot hand the power or enable it. That is what the UN is doing by allowing Russia to remain as a permanent member of the Security Council, which is the only entity that can legitimately approve military action against another state.
Day 166 (8 August)
The Amnesty International controversial report on Ukraine continues after the half-baked apology. The Centre for Strategic Communication has revealed that the AI report was based on interviews in occupied regions of Ukraine, including filtration camps and prisons. It is believed that the interviews were given under duress and, people had to give the ‘correct’ answers to pass through filtration (to say they did not support Zelenskyy or the government) in order to avoid being tortured or imprisoned.
Furthermore, the information did not come from the researchers directly, but journalists in Kharkiv, Donetsk, Luhansk, and Mykolaiv. Questions arise as to how this can be considered objective or responsible when the researchers relied on testimonies given under duress.
Calls for Agnes Callamard’s resignation continue as this is from people who have worked for Amnesty International in the past. They do not believe that the movement can last with her at the helm, and what has happened in the last week has left the organisation with little credibility, and people simply do not trust it any longer.
The Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant has been the subject of several discussions over the past week, notably that inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency wish to visit because they believe the plant is unstable and dangerous. The Russians are also using it as a military base, because they know that the Ukrainians cannot fire missiles at the plant and are using the plant as a shield.
Scholz of Germany has shown support for Ukraine, by telling Putin sanctions will only be lifted or reconsidered if Zelenskyy agrees, and in the event of a genuine cease fire agreed by Ukraine. This comes after numerous alleged war crimes have come to light, and Germany has decided that as long as the US continues support, so will Germany. While the country has shown the side it has chosen, this is becoming very much a much feared US v Russia war, which is what the Russians are claiming this is by proxy.
The first shipment of grain that left Ukraine to Lebanon has not been successful as the buyer has rejected the shipment from the Razoni. Why have they rejected it? Is it because they have enough grain bought from Russia that was stolen? They claim that the shipment is 5 months late, but if they needed the grain, surely they would have accepted it? The hunt is on for a new buyer now, but we can see that even with the blockade being lifted, the stolen grain has been sold already and no one has been punished for that.
Zelenskyy has stated that the current sanctions are too weak, and I have always believed sanctions are fruitless as the crafty will find ways to circumvent things. He has now asked that the West ban Russian travellers, and enforce a travel ban. That would ‘trap’ the Russians in Russia unless they have dual nationality or additional passports as the rich do.
Estonia, Finland, and Latvia agree that the EU should place a ban on Russians visiting Europe. In France, similar steps are being taken where Russians have been banned Russians from visiting Chateau de Vincennes.
Day 167 (9 August)
Taiwan begins two days of military drills including simulated responses to an attack from China. Citizens of the island have been participating in drills in what to do in the event of an emergency, and they, like Ukraine had been waiting for the day they would be attacked by the nation that wanted to reclaim full control of them.
The point is that Taiwan is a small island with few defences compared to China, and China seems to have been encouraged to ‘move in’ with Russia’s recent actions. That is why the US and other neighbouring countries are showing support for Taiwan.
China is continuing navy and air force drills, and this is relevant because this is how wars begin. The Ukrainian invasion began as a military drill that they turned real, and the military instructors were aware of the plan. What we are seeing is a mock war played out by China and Taiwan, which could at any moment go wrong as it did in Ukraine. That’s why many of the Ukrainian soldiers captured in the early days were confused as they were new conscripts who were on a training exercise and then found out it was for real. They were used as cannon fodder.
Belarus has announced it will hold joint military drills with Russia in Belarus from 9-11, and 22-25 August 2022. This seems to be a message to the West, and Belarus has shown its hand and should have sanctions imposed immediately, rather than later when it irate to have any effect.
Ukraine has shot down a number of Kalibr cruise missiles that Russia had launched, and have used the anti-aircraft missile units donated by the West. What we can see is that Ukraine now has the weapons to defeat Russia, and that’s why the weapons need to keep coming to areas under attacks such as Odesa, and in Donetsk. If they had the weapons earlier, they could have prevented some of the occupations in Mariupol, and in the Donbas.
Finland is sending 20 military training personnel to the UK to assist with the training of Ukrainian soldiers. The UK based and led program will train soldiers over the next 6 months in preparation of an escalation of the war, and so they are properly trained to use the donated weapons from the West. What this also shows is that Finland and Sweden, as two potential new NATO members take their membership seriously and are participating in helping Nato create a stronger defensive alliance.
For the first time, The US has released details of specific weapons being sent to Ukraine, and these are unspecified anti-radiation missiles. The threat of using chemical weapons is something that no one wishes to think about, and the release of this information might be a message (or a deterrent)Baykar to the Russians, in that the US is prepared to stand up to Russia if they try and use chemical weapons
.
Baykar, is a company that makes combat drones in Turkey, and the CEO has stated they would never sell to the Russians after they donated a drone to Ukraine (in response to the Lithuania clubbing together to buy one). However, it is reported that Putin asked Erdogan to arrange a deal for him with the company. I believe that statement is important, because whatever Erdogan says, it it s the CEO that has the final say, and there needs to be no doubt that the company supports Ukraine and is not neutral.
Russia has returned the oil payments from Slovenia, Hungary, and the Czech Republic for not paying in rubles, and Transneft has suspended their gas supply. This is Russia again blackmailing Europe over the energy supplies.
The EU has allowed a loophole in the sanctions against Russia which has enabled British components and technology to be used in manufacturing weapons in Russia, to be used to attack Ukraine. Equipment from Golledge Electronics (based in Somerset) has been built into Russian weapons.
The sanctions allowed the export of items as long as the company promised they would not be used for military purposes. Quite how any company could guarantee that I do not know, and it was foolish of the EU to allow a weak caveat. How could a company offer promises that Russia would not use it for military weapons? First of all, when you sell to Russia, can you guarantee anything?
Ukraine has received the first shipment of 50 mine-resistant armoured vehicles from Turkey. Another 150 will be delivered later, but with Erdogan making deals with Putin, which side will Turkey choose when it comes down to it? They might be a member of NATO, but they are clearly pushing things by making financial deals with Russia that allows the latter to profit, which goes against the western efforts to isolate Russia with sanctions.
More Ukrainian traitors and moles have been caught. A recent one was discovered in Kharkiv where sensitive military information was being passed to the Russians. Yesterday, a plot to assassinate public figures and military personnel was uncovered, and was allegedly organised by the Russians.
The threatened sham referendums are struggling to take place as there are not enough proxy collaborators to help hold the referendum. This is because some are being caught, and others know the consequences if they are revealed (Ukrainians will turn on them and perhaps kill them, and if caught will end up in prison).
Russia has been controlling the internet in occupied regions of Ukraine, which has allowed them to censor information and to spread Russian propaganda. By diverting the networks through Russian channels, it means that they can spy on those in occupied regions and monitor calls, texts, messages, and who is watching what.
Russian propaganda continues where Russian state television is claiming the British back Russia, and after the AI report believe that the Ukraine army is killing and endangering the people. The source—the Daily Mail comment section which is laughable as while there are real comments, many are paid for troll comments!
The Russians have launched a rocket that has an Iranian satellite, which it is claimed will be used for surveillance on Ukraine.
Thanks for the comprehensive update of China and Russian aggression. Especially thank you for information on the Amnesty International debacle because philanthropic people need to be aware of where money is going and when trust is being betrayed.
God help the Russian people when they are told that ordinary people who comment on the Daily Mail site that British readers support Russia.