Opinion: Why the US is beating Russia in the Black Sea without firing a shot
...
For 30 to 40 minutes in international airspace over the Black Sea on Tuesday morning local time, two Russian fighter jets harried a slow-moving American surveillance drone by flying dangerously close to it and dumping fuel over it, according to the US military.
Things came to an end only when one of Russia’s Su-27 ‘Flanker’ planes reportedly collided with the propeller on the drone’s tail, causing the MQ-9 Reaper drone to crash into the sea. It was the first time the countries’ military aircraft made direct physical contact since the start of the Ukraine war last year.
A video released by the US military Thursday shows the aggressive fuel dumping maneuver, as well as the approach of an Su-27 jet that seems likely to have clipped the drone. Subsequent footage shows impact damage to the propeller. The video further eroded the credibility of Moscow’s denial that any collision took place.
The Russian jets’ activities were bullying, pure and simple — at best an attempt to muscle aircraft out of airspace that’s open to all, if not outright destroy it. Some are tempted to advocate a response in kind to punish Russia for this episode, including Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC), who recently said on Fox News the US should threaten that any future Russian aircraft approaching those of the US military would be “shot down.”
But Washington shouldn’t stoop to Moscow’s level. The best reaction to schoolyard bullying is to show you aren’t rattled by provocations, and this arena is no different.
That doesn’t mean the US should stop its surveillance flights, both manned and unmanned, over this (and other) international airspace. In fact, it’s essential that the US continue its missions unabated. But an excessively dramatic American reaction could destabilize the current norms surrounding such flights and lead to a tit-for-tat spiral with the Kremlin that could escalate unpredictably.
That’s something to be avoided unless absolutely essential — particularly because at present these surveillance flights are giving the US valuable intelligence. Russia’s military has already been paying a price pretty much daily thanks to the intelligence collection activities of MQ-9 drones and other systems.
It would be counterproductive to jeopardize that with a heated response to Russia’s bad behavior, something that remains true even though this incident is far from isolated and encounters such as these are likely to increase.
In October, the UK said that a Russian Su-27 tailing a British RC-135W plane over the Black Sea fired a missile nearby (Russia said it was an accident). Fortunately no damage was done. In 2016, Russian bombers buzzed dangerously low over the US destroyer Donald Cook while it was on patrol in the Black Sea. And there was even a 2019 incident where a Russian warship intentionally came within 50 feet of colliding with the USS Chancellorsville, per the US military. Overall, since Russia’s invasion of Crimea in 2014 and the subsequent Western backlash, such encounters have multiplied in frequency.
It’s worth unpacking which surveillance encounters violate common norms and which don’t. Rival militaries that are not at war routinely shadow each other’s activities and intercept each other’s aircraft and ships — in other words, send fast planes and vessels to come within close visual range of their adversaries’ craft to show they’re being watched and kept at bay. It’s legal under international law and generally perceived as acceptable over international waters so long as neither side performs maneuvers dangerously close to the other.
Russian pilots often practice safe intercepts in more routine encounters, as do American pilots. But a 2022 study by the Rand Corporation found that Russian pilots were apparently ordered to conduct unsafe intercepts to try to drive away foreign forces near areas they consider sensitive.
Undoubtedly at the heart of Russia’s aggressive intercept Tuesday was the drone’s gathering of intelligence that could be used to assist Ukraine’s military. But galling as that may be for Moscow, the US and Russia haven’t declared war against each other, and physical attacks on the other’s military in international waters and airspace remain illegal except in self-defense against direct, imminent attack.
What most likely happened on Tuesday is that the Russian pilots were instructed to seriously harass the drone, and pilot error then resulted in an unplanned collision. As for Russia’s complaints that the drone turned off its transponders (which makes it possible to identify the aircraft at a distance), the fighters interacted with the drone for more than a half hour; it’s hardly believable that they didn’t know it was American — and if they thought it was Ukrainian, they would have almost certainly shot it down.
Russia would like to pretend the Black Sea is its personal pond, but these are international waters bordered by Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania and Turkey as well — all but one are NATO members. The rules surrounding international waters and airspace are clear: National sovereignty extends no further than 12 nautical miles from the nearest coastline or border. If Russia wants to dispatch nuclear-capable bombers just farther than 12 nautical miles off the coast of Alaska, it can and has done so without major incident.
In the current case, Russia is insisting the drone was in an exclusion zone it asserted around Ukraine for its “special military operation” (i.e. a full-fledged war of conquest). While countries claim all kinds of additional jurisdictions like exclusive economic zones and air defense identification zones, the 12 nautical mile rule is the only one that has indisputable weight internationally.
In the current case, the US has responded so far by dressing down the Russian ambassador over the incident. The Pentagon might also decide to send manned fighters to escort drones to dissuade harassment. But this is something that couldn’t be sustained indefinitely; the point of drones is they’re generally much less costly per hour to operate than fighters and put personnel at less risk. Alternatively, the drones could be armed with their own air-to-air missiles.
Either way, the impact would be mostly psychological because US aircraft are unlikely to be authorized to shoot at Russian warplanes merely for performing dangerous maneuvers. The ethics of attacks on drones constitute a Wild West since the expansion of their technology has been so rapid. But since their destruction rightly lacks the moral weight of an attack on a manned craft, it makes sense not to treat the downing of an individual drone as a casus belli — which is what the Trump administration assessed in 2019 when it cancelled a retaliatory strike after Iran downed a US drone.
A sustained, deliberate pattern of destructive Russian attacks on drones would merit a response, but that’s not the case with the Black Sea collision — yet. For now, the US can and should confidently continue to occupy the high ground from a position of strength, defending a mutual norm which gives the United States, its allies and even its enemies transparency regarding each other’s military actions.
Цитата:
The US was prepared to bomb the Middle East into shape. In Ukraine, it seems no less self-serving
...
n the two decades since the second Iraq war, the United States appears like the Bourbon kings who had learned nothing and forgotten nothing. The illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq was a story of geopolitical failure and domestic political disaster. To understand the foolhardy decision to launch the war, one must first understand the US grand strategy of global hegemony, which Washington has pursued since 1945.
The “war on terror” provided political cover for the further pursuit of supremacy, despite threatening democratic government with lies, fraud and violence. George W Bush’s rash actions did provoke some murmurs of concern about the damage being inflicted but these faded from the corridors of power. Instead the US has refused to move on, believing that countries are “either with us or against us”.
The key to US strength has been its ability to dominate the three regions of the world of most importance to it for security and economic reasons: western Europe, east Asia and the Middle East. American power depends on preventing the emergence of a dominant rival on the Eurasian landmass or a single power in the Gulf controlling the majority of the world’s oil reserves. Nonetheless the present-day coalitions emerging could lead to these outcomes.
History suggests that when one great power becomes too powerful it is defeated by the counter-balancing efforts of the other major powers. Vladimir Putin’s unlawful and bloody invasion of Ukraine has thrown into sharp relief how differently the conflict is viewed by US allies and the rest of the world. It is the latter’s expanding trade with Moscow that helps Russia dodge western sanctions on everything from oil to microchips. This, along with China’s rise, has exposed US attempts to maintain its “unipolar” power in the international political system, which it obtained after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1989.
The US portrays the arrival of a world that is both multipolar and ideologically diverse as a moment of great danger. The more great powers, the reasoning goes, the greater the number of rivalries and the greater chance that wars could break out. The opposite could also be true with nations such as Turkey and India acting to avoid picking sides in disputes. States freed from a US policy to entangle rising powers in a web of rules designed to benefit Washington may find better terms elsewhere. The deal this month to restore relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, negotiated by China, underlines the accelerating Sino-American rivalry.
In global affairs the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Yet policies must be judged on their consequences. US strategy since the 1970s had been to keep Moscow out of the Middle East. The calamitous invasion and occupation of Iraq proved an invitation for other powers to enter the region. By 2016, there was a Saudi-Russian oil partnership, Russian support for the Iranian regime and a Russian military presence in Syria. In that year, the US had a choice of electing a confront-China candidate, Donald Trump, or a confront-Russia candidate, Hillary Clinton. It is now led by a president, Joe Biden, apparently willing to take on both giant rivals at once in the belief that the US can be safe only in a world of like-minded democratic states. The Manichaean quality to American foreign policy enunciated so clearly in Bush’s rhetoric has not gone away.
The capricious and self-centred nature of American power is well known to friend and foe alike. The US was prepared to split with old allies to bomb the Middle East into a shape that suited it. Washington had little time for French and German diplomatic protests against the illegal nature of the Iraq war. Hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed. The political system planted in Iraq by Washington has intensified divisions and made it practically ungovernable. While Iraq’s oil has flowed on to world markets, about $150bn has been corruptly siphoned off. A token number of US troops remain to keep Islamic State at bay, but the real power in Baghdad runs through Tehran. Iran’s allied militias have the casting vote in Iraqi politics. The US could write off the failure of Iraq because a shale oil and gas boom made the country an energy superpower.
The US never lost its taste for being the world’s sheriff. Against the backdrop of the Arab spring, in 2011 Barack Obama sent US forces back into action in Libya, without care for Germany’s disagreement at the UN security council, on a mission that drifted into an unannounced goal of regime change and a bloody civil war. The botched American withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 came out of the blue and as a shock to Britain, which had suffered the second-highest casualties among western nations in keeping the Taliban out. As to the wisdom of letting the militants overrun Kabul, London’s view was judged irrelevant.
There is a warning in Iraq’s recent travails for Ukraine: in US politics success is supreme and no moral law is binding. For all the talk of “unwavering support”, there is a domestic constraint on US war casualties that Iraq helped to reanimate. Biden won’t see American troops fight Russian ones. That would be the third world war. His officials have already talked about plans for a postwar order on the east European plain. This rightly unnerves the Kyiv regime, which sees in a hasty end to the war a requirement to cede territory to Russia.
But Washington has already achieved three significant foreign policy objectives. First, Putin is now a pariah in European eyes. Second, the US is displacing Russia as Europe’s top gas supplier, thus freeing Nato’s big powers from energy dependence on Moscow. Third, Germany’s industrial power, the engine of the eurozone, will not – as Berlin had bet it would – rely on the Baltic transit of Russian gas. The EU is likely to be a more pliant American ally in the future.
The US won’t want to look like it is pulling the rug from beneath Kyiv. But history suggests Washington would prefer an imperfect peace to a forever war. Biden, who was in favour of the Iraq invasion, has not forgotten that Obama rode into power as the anti-war candidate. He will be looking over his shoulder at Republican presidential candidates who argue that protecting Ukraine is not a vital US interest. If a Ukrainian victory could be declared now it would still leave the country in need of rebuilding. A good deal of this could be paid for with the $300bn of Russian central bank assets currently frozen in the hands of G7 states and the EU.
Washington will also not want to be out of step with public opinion in large swathes of the globe for too long. Iraq showed that international politics is not an ideological crusade of good versus evil. Putin’s invasion has revived the solidarity of the west. But Washington should stop pretending that the global triumph of US hegemony is within reach again.
...
Russian MFA spokesperson spreading 'bogus narrative' about Poland
...
"Notorious for her aggressive outreach and spreading lies, the Spox for the Russian Foreign Ministry has yet again attacked Poland," Żaryn tweeted. "This time, M. Zakharova amplified the Kremlin's bogus narrative about Poland's alleged plans to invade Ukraine."
Żaryn said Zakharova had based her statements on media reports suggesting Polish involvement in building a training centre in Ukraine, which she used as a starting point for a broadside against Poland.
"Her blatant manipulation was based on media reports suggesting the involvement of the Polish entities in the construction of a training center in Ukraine," Żaryn wrote. "According to Zakharova's, the initiative reported by the media 'drags Poland' into the conflict and constitutes a part of Warsaw's vicious plan to feed its imperial hungers at the expense of Ukraine – a narrative constantly pushed by the Kremlin."
He added that Zakharova, whom he described as "one of the most devoted mouthpieces of Russian propaganda" had falsely claimed that through assisting in the project, Poland sought to "increase its military presence in Ukraine" and that Warsaw's aim was to "exert control over its south-eastern neighbor."
"On top of that she lied that the allegedly massive presence of 'the Polish mercenaries' in Ukraine was a state-sanctioned preparation for the annexation of the country's Western lands," Żaryn wrote, going on to state that since its invasion in February last year, Russia had sought to destabilise Polish-Ukrainian relations and had to this end conducted a months-long disinformation campaign presenting Poland as a threat to Ukraine.
Цитата:
Hunter Biden files response against computer repair shop owner
...
Hunter Biden has filed a countersuit against a computer repair shop owner, alleging invasion of privacy in response to an ongoing defamation suit filed by the shop owner last year. The suit marks Biden’s first legal filing since his laptop has become a point of interest.
In the 42-page legal filing Friday morning, attorneys for Biden assert six counterclaims, alleging that computer repairman John Paul Mac Isaac had no legal right to obtain and distribute data from Biden’s laptop, an issue that became central in the weeks leading up to the 2020 presidential election. Images, emails and text messages that allegedly belonged to Hunter Biden later became public.
“The object of invading Mr. Biden’s privacy and disseminating his data was not for any legitimate purpose but to cause harm and embarrassment to Mr. Biden,” the filing reads.
Mac Isaac claims the laptop and external hard drive became his property in 2019 when Biden didn’t retrieve the items within 90 days after leaving them at the shop, which attorneys for Biden are challenging. The repair shop owner claims Biden defamed him by saying he had illegally accessed the data.
Attorneys for Biden claimed that Mac Isaac did not act responsibly with the data found on the laptop and hard drive.
”Reputable computer companies and repair people routinely delete personal data contained on devices that are exchanged, left behind or abandoned,” the filing reads. ”They do not open, copy, and then provide that data to others, as Mac Isaac did here.”
Mac Isaac turned the laptop and external hard drive over to the FBI in 2019 and attempted to share the information from the devices with former President Donald Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani.
Biden’s lawyers are also seeking depositions from Steve Bannon and Giuliani in the suit.
Biden doesn’t confirm in the filing that the laptop is his. “Mr. Biden is without knowledge sufficient to admit or deny the allegations,” the filing states.
The data from the laptop became a point of interest after stories were published by the New York Post before the 2020 election.
POLITICO has not authenticated the Biden hard drive files that underpinned an October 2020 New York Post story, but POLITICO reporter Ben Schreckinger confirmed the authenticity of some emails on the drive in a 2021 book.
Last year, Mac Isaac sued POLITICO, CNN, Hunter Biden, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and the Biden presidential campaign committee for defamation and civil conspiracy in state court in Delaware. Earlier this month, the federal government stepped in for Schiff and removed the case to federal court in Wilmington, arguing that the suit pertains to acts he took in his official capacity as a member of Congress.
Friday’s filing comes as Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), chair of the House Oversight Committee, prepares an investigation into Biden. The suit is also part of a broader campaign of legal pushback from Biden’s attorneys, warning those involved in publicizing assertions about his laptop computer that they could face unspecified litigation over their claims.
The Justice Department is reported to be in the final stages of deciding whether to bring criminal charges against Hunter Biden in connection with alleged tax offenses and his alleged failure to disclose his status as a drug user when applying to buy a handgun in 2018.
Собрали главное по итогам первой поездки Путина в Донбасс:
— президент прилетел в Мариуполь на вертолёте, объехал несколько районов за рулём машины и зашёл в гости к жителям новостройки;
— по словам Хуснуллина, к концу года закончат реконструкцию центра Мариуполя, где много зданий-памятников;
— в городе снесли 307 домов, не подлежавших восстановлению, с остальными активно работают;
— уже запущен общественный транспорт, работает 110 автобусов, к лету запустят трамваи;
— в конце 2023 года начнут реконструкцию местного аэропорта, а к 2025-му из него запустят внутренние и международные рейсы;
— дорога между Мариуполем и Донецком полностью готова, это четырёхполосная трасса, по которой можно доехать меньше чем за час;
— к концу года в городе запустят первую очередь больницы ФМБА. Там будет 60 коек, всего планируют организовать 300 мест;
— за три месяца в Мариуполе восстановили повреждённое здание филармонии. В апреле там поставят первый спектакль.
Судя по видео, которое публикуют российские СМИ, Путин прилетел в Мариуполь на вертолёте вечером в воскресенье. Перемещался по городу он за рулем седана Тойота. При этом, стоял на светофорах, включал поворотники, но ехал, как заметили журналисты по спидометру, довольно медленно.
В Мариуполе Путин посетил:
- новостройки,
- филармонию,
- яхт-клуб,
- монумент освободителям Донбасса от нацистов
- аэродром, куда прилетел и откуда улетел на вертолете.
2. Зачем Путин приехал в Мариуполь?
Это первый визит Путина на захваченные после 24 февраля территории. Характерно, что Путин его совершил на следующий день после того, как Международный суд выдал ордер на его арест. Не исключено, что одна из целей поездки - показать, что президент РФ селя чувствует уверенно и не боится появляться на захваченных территориях даже в том городе, по которому не так давно наносили удары ВСУ.
Кроме того, этот визит ещё раз подчёркивает ту роль, которую Мариуполю определили российские власти - быть «витриной восстановления» аннексированных территорий. Как уже писала «Страна» на стройки в Мариуполе РФ направила большие ресурсы.
И ещё один возможный смысл визита связан с информацией о подготовке Украиной крупного наступления на южном направлении с целью выйти к Азовскому морю и передать сухопутный коридор в Крым. Путин, приехав в Мариуполь, как бы показывает, что это направление Россия намерена оборонять всеми силами.
3. Реакция Украины
"Преступника всегда тянет на место преступления. Пока страны цивилизованного мира заявляют об аресте "режиссера войны" (Путина В. В.) в случае пересечения границы, организатор убийств тысяч мариупольских семей приехал любоваться развалинами города и братскими могилами. Цинизм и отсутствие раскаяния", - написал советник главы ОП Михаил Подоляк.
Цитата:
Defiant Putin Visits Mariupol, a City Razed by Russian Forces
...
The visit to Mariupol by Mr. Putin — who now stands accused by the International Criminal Court of presiding over the abduction of Ukrainian children — was his second unannounced trip of the weekend to parts of Ukraine that Russian forces have occupied. On Saturday, he went to Crimea in a visit timed to coincide with the ninth anniversary of the peninsula’s annexation.
But the visit to Mariupol was the closest Mr. Putin has come to the front lines since the start of the full-scale invasion last February; the city is around 50 miles southeast of the town of Vuhledar, where Russian forces sustained heavy losses just weeks ago and where fierce fighting continues. Mr. Putin has set the capture of the entire eastern Donbas region as his military’s primary objective. Since Mariupol is in Donetsk Province, part of Donbas, his visit was the first to a region at the heart of the war.
Mr. Zelensky, by contrast, has made several visits to the front line and to recently recaptured parts of the country. In December, for example, he went to the embattled city of Bakhmut — another city in Donetsk that also has been held up as a symbol of Ukrainian resistance.
The timing of Mr. Putin’s trip could be interpreted as an affront to the I.C.C., which on Friday issued the warrant for his arrest over the taking of Ukrainian children. The warrant claims that Mr. Putin bears individual criminal responsibility for the deportation of the thousands of Ukrainian children to Russia since last year’s invasion. The Ukrainian authorities have said that many abducted children were from Mariupol — and Mr. Putin’s weekend trip to Crimea notably featured a visit to a children’s center.
While the I.C.C. warrant could impact Mr. Putin’s ability to travel overseas and adds to his isolation from the West, the Kremlin has said it considers the warrant meaningless and vowed not to cooperate.
...
Цитата:
Putin makes surprise trip to Russian-occupied Mariupol in wake of ICC warrant
...
March 19 (Reuters) - A day after being accused of war crimes by the International Criminal Court, President Vladimir Putin made a surprise visit to the Russian-occupied Ukrainian city of Mariupol, scene of some of the worst devastation of his year-old invasion.
…
Putin's visit had the air of a gesture of defiance after the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for his arrest on Friday, accusing him of the war crime of deporting hundreds of children from Ukraine.
(выделено а.п.)
He has not publicly commented on the move, but his spokesman said it was legally "null and void" and that Russia found the very questions raised by the ICC to be "outrageous and unacceptable".
The visit to Mariupol was the first that Putin has made to the Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine's Donbas region since the war started, and the closest he has come to the front lines.
While Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has made a number of trips to the battlefield to boost the morale of his troops and talk strategy, Putin has largely remained inside the Kremlin while running what Russia calls its "special military operation" in Ukraine.
Kyiv and its allies say the invasion is an imperialistic land grab that has killed thousands and displaced millions of people in Ukraine.
'PIECE OF HEAVEN'
Putin's trip to Mariupol took place in darkness. State TV showed him at the wheel of a car, driving through the city in the company of his deputy prime minister, Khusnullin, and being briefed in detail on the rebuilding of housing, bridges, hospitals, transport routes and a concert hall.
...
Цитата:
Provocative Putin makes surprise trip to occupied Mariupol
...
A provocative Vladimir Putin made a surprise weekend visit to Russian-occupied Mariupol, one of the symbols of Ukrainian resistance.
…
It is the closest to the front lines Putin has been since the yearlong war began. The move is likely to be seen as particularly provoking to Ukrainians. The trip to Mariupol came after Putin travelled to Crimea on Saturday in an unannounced visit to mark the ninth anniversary of Russia’s annexation of the peninsula from Ukraine, the Kremlin said in a statement.
Putin’s visits come just after the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for the Russian leader and top Russian official Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova over the forced transfer of Ukrainian children to Russia.
German Justice Minister Marco Buschmann said on Sunday that if Putin enters the territory of Germany, he would be detained under the ICC warrant. “Germany will be obliged to arrest President Putin if he enters German territory and hand him over to the ICC,” Buschmann told the Bilt am Sonntag newspaper.
So far during Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, Putin has largely remained inside the Kremlin, while Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has made a number of trips to the battlefield to boost the morale of Kyiv’s troops.
...
Продолжение поста: «…», темы: «Примечания и Дополнения», следует…
Последний раз редактировалось: Dimitriy (19.03.2023 20:00), всего редактировалось 1 раз
Продолжение поста: «…», темы: «Примечания и Дополнения»
Замечательная статья полностью и официально перечеркивающая наследие Ялты.
Цитата:
Russia and China want to disrupt the world order, NSC spokesperson says
...
Russia and China are attempting to shake up the international order, National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said Sunday.
China and Russia, Kirby said on “Fox News Sunday,” “are two countries that are chafing against this international rules-based order that the United States and so many of our allies and partners have built up, since the end of World War II.”
He added: “They’d like to rewrite the rules of the game globally.”
Kirby said the United States would be watching carefully to see what emerges from the much-heralded meetings between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin this week in Russia.
“They have been increasing their cooperation and their relationship, certainly of late,” Kirby said of the two superpowers.
China recently floated a 12-point plan designed to end the Russia-Ukraine war. Kirby told host Mike Emanuel that the Biden administration remains dubious of China’s intentions when it comes to this war.
“What we have said before,” Kirby said, “and we’ll say it again today, that if coming out of this meeting, there’s some sort of call for a ceasefire, well, that’s just going to be unacceptable because all that’s going to do, Mike, is ratify Russian’s conquest to date.”
Kirby said he hoped China’s president would keep open “lines of communication” with President Joe Biden and also seek out the Ukrainian side of the story through discussions with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
“We hope, and we’ve said this before, that President Xi will call and talk to President Zelenskyy because we believe that the Chinese need to get the Ukrainian perspective here,” Kirby said.
Цитата:
Russia and China want to disrupt the world order, NSC spokesperson says
...
WASHINGTON — As Xi Jinping, China’s leader, prepares to meet with President Vladimir V. Putin in Moscow this week, Chinese officials have been framing his trip as a mission of peace, one where he will seek to “play a constructive role in promoting talks” between Russia and Ukraine, as a government spokesman in Beijing put it.
But American and European officials are watching for something else altogether — whether Mr. Xi will add fuel to the full-scale war that Mr. Putin began more than a year ago.
U.S. officials say China is still considering giving weapons — mainly artillery shells — to Russia for use in Ukraine. And even a call by Mr. Xi for a cease-fire would amount to an effort to strengthen Mr. Putin’s battlefield position, they say, by leaving Russia in control of more territory than when the invasion began.
A cease-fire now would be “effectively the ratification of Russian conquest,” John Kirby, a White House spokesman, said on Friday. “It would in effect recognize Russia’s gains and its attempt to conquer its neighbor’s territory by force, allowing Russian troops to continue to occupy sovereign Ukrainian territory.”
“It would be a classic part of the China playbook,” he added, for Chinese officials to come out of the meeting claiming “we’re the ones calling for an end to the fighting and nobody else is.”
That skepticism of one of Mr. Xi’s stated goals pervades thinking in Washington and some European capitals. American intelligence agencies have concluded that relations between China and Russia have deepened during the war, even as Russia has become isolated from many other nations.
The two countries continue to do joint military exercises, and Beijing has joined Moscow in regularly denouncing the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. China remains one of the biggest buyers of Russian oil, which has helped Moscow finance its invasion.
Chinese officials have at no point condemned the invasion. Instead, they have said ambiguously that all nations must respect each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. They have worked with Russian diplomats to block international statements condemning the war, including at gatherings of the Group of 20 countries in India in February and March.
While some Chinese officials see Mr. Putin’s war as destabilizing, they recognize a greater priority in foreign policy: the need to buttress Russia so the two nations can present a united front against their perceived adversary, the United States.
Mr. Xi made his views clear when he said earlier this month at an annual political meeting in Beijing that “Western countries led by the United States have implemented all-around containment, encirclement and suppression of China, which has brought unprecedented severe challenges to our country’s development.”
But China remains firmly anchored in the global economy, and Mr. Xi and his aides want to avoid being seen as malign actors on the world stage, especially in the eyes of Europe, a major trade partner. Some analysts say Mr. Xi has adopted the guise of peacemaker, claiming he is on a mission to end the war to provide cover for efforts to strengthen his partnership with Mr. Putin, whom the International Criminal Court on Friday formally accused of war crimes in an arrest warrant.
Mr. Xi and Mr. Putin have a strong personal affinity and have met 39 times since Mr. Xi became China’s leader in 2012.
China’s release last month of a 12-point statement of broad principles on the war was an attempt at creating a smoke screen of neutrality during planning for Mr. Xi’s trip, some analysts say.
“I think China is trying to muddy the picture, to say we’re not there to support Russia, we’re there to support peace,” said Yun Sun, a scholar of China’s foreign policy at the Stimson Center in Washington.
“There’s an intrinsic need for China to maintain or protect the health of its relationship with Russia,” she said, adding that a senior Chinese official had told her that geopolitics and U.S. intransigence were driving Beijing’s approach to the relationship — not love of Russia.
Ms. Sun said China’s recent mediation of an initial diplomatic rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran had boosted notions of China as a peacemaker. But that situation was entirely different than the Ukraine war — the two Middle Eastern nations had already been in talks for years to try to restart formal diplomacy, and China entered the picture as both sides reached for a deal. China is not a close partner of either country and has a very specific economic interest in preventing the two from escalating their hostilities — it buys large amounts of oil from both.
When Mr. Putin visited Mr. Xi in Beijing right before the start of the Ukraine war in February 2022, their governments proclaimed a “no-limits” partnership in a 5,000-word statement. The two men saw each other again last September at a security conference in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. Mr. Xi has not talked to Volodymyr Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, since the war began, much less ask for his perspective on peace talks.
Mr. Zelensky has said he would enter peace talks only if Mr. Putin withdrew his troops from Ukrainian territory. That includes the Crimean Peninsula, which the Russian military seized in 2014, and the Donbas region, where that same year Russian troops stoked a pro-Russia separatist insurgency.
Mr. Zelensky has said he would welcome a chance to speak with Mr. Xi, and some Ukrainian officials hold out hope that China will eventually exercise its leverage over Russia to get Mr. Putin to withdraw his troops. But China has not indicated it would make any such move.
On Thursday, Qin Gang, the foreign minister of China, spoke by phone with Dmytro Kuleba, the foreign minister of Ukraine, and stressed that the warring sides should “resume peace talks” and “return to the track of political settlement,” according to a Chinese summary of the conversation.
In an interview with the BBC before Mr. Xi’s visit was announced, Mr. Kuleba said he believed China was neither ready to arm Russia nor bring about peace. “The visit to Moscow in itself is a message, but I don’t think it will have any immediate consequences,” he said.
Analysts in Washington concur. “I don’t think China can serve as a fulcrum on which any Ukraine peace process could move,” said Ryan Hass, a former U.S. diplomat to China and White House official who is a scholar at the Brookings Institution.
Mr. Hass added that China would have a role as part of a signing or guaranteeing group for any eventual peace deal and would be critical to Ukraine’s reconstruction. “I believe Zelensky understands this, which is why he has been willing to exercise so much patience with China and with Xi personally,” he said.
European officials have had varying attitudes toward China, and some prioritize preserving trade ties with Beijing. But China’s alignment with Russia throughout the war has spurred growing suspicion and hostility in many corners of Europe. On Friday, some officials reacted warily to the announcement of Mr. Xi’s trip to Moscow — they saw it as a further sign of China’s friendship if not alliance with Russia, as well as an effort by China to present itself as a mediator in the war.
Wang Yi, China’s top foreign policy official, stressed the need for peace talks at the Munich Security Conference late last month before a stop in Moscow. He used language that appeared aimed at peeling European nations away from the United States.
“We need to think calmly, especially our friends in Europe, about what efforts should be made to stop the warfare; what framework should there be to bring lasting peace to Europe; what role should Europe play to manifest its strategic autonomy,” he said.
He suggested that Washington wanted the war to continue to further weaken Russia. “Some forces might not want to see peace talks materialize,” he said. “They don’t care about the life and death of Ukrainians or the harms on Europe. They might have strategic goals larger than Ukraine itself. This warfare must not continue.”
But China’s 12-point statement did not go over well in Europe. And many European officials, like their Ukrainian and American counterparts, are convinced that early talks on a peace settlement will be at the expense of Ukrainian sovereignty.
Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, said China’s stance was anything but neutral.
“It is not a peace plan, but principles that they shared,” she said of China’s statement. “You have to see them against a specific backdrop. And that is the backdrop that China has taken sides, by signing for example an unlimited friendship right before Russia’s invasion in Ukraine started.”
China’s regular denunciations of NATO make European officials bristle. In its position paper, China said “the security of a region should not be achieved by strengthening or expanding military blocs” — a statement that supports Mr. Putin’s claim that he had to invade Ukraine because of threats that included NATO expansion.
The Chinese position “builds on a misplaced focus on the so-called ‘legitimate security interests and concerns’ of parties, implying a justification for Russia’s illegal invasion, and blurring the roles of the aggressor and the aggressed,” said Nabila Massrali, a spokeswoman for foreign affairs and security policy at the European Union.
Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO secretary general, put it more simply: “China doesn’t have much credibility,” especially because “they have not been able to condemn the illegal invasion of Ukraine.”
Окончание поста: «…», темы: «Примечания и Дополнения», следует…
Окончание поста: «…», темы: «Примечания и Дополнения»
Цитата:
Цитата:
19 мар. 2023 г.
Цитата:
19 мар. 2023 г.
Цитата:
Председатель Следственного комитета России Александр Бастрыкин поручил дать правовую оценку заявлениям министра юстиции ФРГ об аресте граждан России на территории Германии. Об этом сообщили в пресс-службе СК РФ.
Цитата:
РФ обвинила ФРГ в "стремлении к дальнейшей эскалации конфликта" из-за слов главы Минюста Германии о возможном аресте Владимира Путина.
Министр юстиции ФРГ Марко Бушман пообещал, что выполнит требование Международного уголовного суда в Гааге арестовать президента России, если тот окажется в Германии, поскольку Берлин подчиняется требованиям МУС.
Посол России в Германии Сергей Нечаев назвал "безответственными" слова "некоторых германских официальных лиц". А председатель Следственного комитета РФ Александр Бастрыкин потребовал дать правовую оценку высказываниям немецкого министра.
Международный уголовный суд в Гааге 17 марта выдал ордер на арест Владимира Путина. В МУС подозревают президента РФ в совершении военных преступлений - незаконной депортации и перемещении украинских детей.
Цитата:
Wir würden Putin sofort verhaften
...
Der in Den Haag ansässige Internationale Strafgerichtshof (IStGH) klagt den Kreml-Machthaber wegen der mutmaßlichen Deportation ukrainischer Kinder an – im Völkerrecht ist das als Kriegsverbrechen geächtet.
Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz (64, SPD) begrüßte die Entscheidung während seiner Japan-Reise. Niemand stehe über Recht und Gesetz.
Ja, sagt Bundesjustizminister Marco Buschmann (45, FDP) zu BamS: „Ich rechne damit, dass der IStGH zügig auf Interpol (die internationale Polizeibehörde, d. Red.) sowie die Vertragsstaaten zugehen und sie um Vollstreckung ersuchen wird.“
Deutschland sei dann verpflichtet, Putin, wenn er deutsches Territorium betritt, zu inhaftieren und an den IStGH zu übergeben, so Buschmann weiter.
Zustimmung von Völkerrechtsprofessor Marcel Kau (Uni Konstanz). Er hält den Haftbefehl aus Den Haag „für eine einschneidende Maßnahme mit weitreichenden rechtlichen und – im Hinblick auf Putins Bewegungsfreiheit – tatsächlichen Folgen“. Zwei Drittel aller Staaten seien daran gebunden, darunter alle EU-Mitglieder.
Und was ist mit dem Rest der Welt? Experte Kau: „Im Völkerrecht wird in zunehmendem Umfang davon gesprochen, dass möglicherweise auch Nicht-Vertragsstaaten verpflichtet sein könnten, Angeklagte nach Den Haag auszuliefern.“
Allerdings werden jetzt auch Verhandlungen mit dem Kriegstreiber außerhalb Russlands schwieriger. Kau: „Selbst wenn man Putin zu Friedensgesprächen in die EU einladen würde, müsste man ihn rechtlich vom Haftbefehl freistellen.“
Wahrscheinlicher ist ohnehin, dass Putin nie wieder freiwillig einen Fuß auf westlichen Boden setzt.
...
Выселение монахов Украинской православной церкви из Киево-Печерской Лавры даст России новые аргументы для оправдания своей агрессии против Украины, заявляют в УПЦ.
Заявление опубликовано на сайте Лаврского монастыря в ответ на обращение предстоятеля Православной церкви Украины митрополита Епифания к братии Лавры о том, что все, кто перейдёт в ПЦУ, продолжит служение.
"Ответ на подобные заявления Епифания сами монахи Киево-Печерской Лавры дали еще 27 января 2023 года, где заявили, что "мы были, есть и будем в истине и верны своей канонической церкви и ее предстоятелю — блаженнейшему митрополиту Онуфрию" и в ПЦУ не пойдут. В Лавре проживают монахи, являющиеся гражданами Украины. В Лавре живут украинцы, украинское монашество, а не российское, как об этом часто ложно говорят в наших СМИ. "Власти московского патриархата" в Лавре не было и нет", - сказано в заявлении.
"Выселение монахов из Лавры провоцирует россиян и дальше "защищать православных", давая им все новые и новые аргументы для оправдания своей агрессии против Украины, как об этом недавно заявил пресс-секретарь российского президента Песков, дав понять, что "выселение монахов из Лавры оправдывает цели спецоперации". Поэтому когда Епифаний заявляет, что "это историческое событие враг использует, чтобы расколоть украинское единство и посеять непонимание между нами", то возникает вопрос, кто на самом деле такими решениями и действиями дает врагу поводы для этого?", - говорится в обращении УПЦ.
Кроме того, в отдельном видеообращении наместник Свято-Успенской Киево-Печерской Лавры митрополит Павел в очередной раз заявил, что монахи УПУ из Лавры выселятся не будут. По его словам, "нас никто этого не заставит, так как нет повода для выселения".
As the Met reclassifies Russian art as Ukrainian, not everyone is convinced
...
Questions of attribution are constantly under review by art scholars, but rarely are they so topical or heated as institutional efforts underway in the US and in Europe to reclassify art once described as Russian as Ukrainian.
In New York, the Metropolitan Museum of Art has quietly changed the name of an 1899 painting by the French Impressionist Edgar Degas from Russian Dancer to Dancer in Ukrainian Dress.
The Met also holds works by Arkhyp Kuindzhi and Ilya Repin, a 19th-century painter who was born in what is now Ukraine. The artists were previously listed as Russian and are now categorized as Ukrainian.
But seascape painter Ivan Aivazovsky, whom the Met had also changed from Russian to Ukrainian, was abruptly relisted as Armenian on Thursday, after an outcry from New York’s Armenian community.
The Armenian-American news outlet Asbarez objected to the painter’s reattribution and noted that the Met had acknowledged that Aivazovsky was “born into an Armenian family in the Crimean port city of Feodosia on the Black Sea”.
Separately, an article in Hyperallergic described the Met’s attribution changes as “misguided”. “We should not replace the ignorance shown in the previous identification with a new type of ignorance,” its author Vartan Matiossian wrote.
The reattributions in New York follow moves at the National Gallery in London last year to change the name of another of Degas’ dancer series from Russian Dancers to Ukrainian Dancers, since the subjects of Degas’ work, judged by their costumes, likely came from what is now Ukraine, which was then part of the Russian empire.
The National Gallery told the Guardian last year that it was “an appropriate moment to update the painting’s title to better reflect the subject of the painting”.
Similar decisions have been made regarding other artists like Kazimir Malevich, Ilya Kabakov, Sonia Delaunay-Terk and Louise Nevelson, who were also born in modern-day Ukraine when it was under the control of the Russian empire.
The moves are described by some as part of an effort to correctly attribute the contribution of Ukrainian artists to art history. But they have also been denounced by others. Last week, Mikhail Shvydkoy, the international culture envoy to Russian President Vladimir Putin, hit out at the alterations, describing them as politically motivated.
“This lame political gesture has trumped all legitimate cultural considerations,” Shvydkoy said in remarks obtained by Newsweek. “The history of renaming world-famous paintings and the disassociation of great artists from the word Russia, commenced a little less than a year ago, when the process of abolishing Russian culture was gaining momentum.”
In a statement, Max Hollein, the director of the Met, said: “The Met’s curators and experts are continually researching and examining objects in the collection in order to determine the most appropriate and accurate way to catalogue and present them.
“In the case of these works – which have been updated following research conducted in collaboration with experts in the field – scholarly thinking is evolving quickly, because of the increased awareness of and attention to Ukrainian culture and history since the Russian invasion started in 2022,” he added.
The question of whether Degas considered his subjects Russian or Ukrainian has also come into question. By some accounts, the Russian attribution was given by his dealer Paul Durand-Ruel, who bought one of the series from the painter in 1906.
The Met has reportedly been considering the update since last summer to align with “efforts to continually research and examine objects in its collection”. Degas’ The Russian Dancer was identified as “women in Russian costumes” in a journal entry in 1899.
“However, several scholars demonstrated that the costumes are, in fact, traditional Ukrainian folk dress, although it has not been established if the dancers were themselves from Ukraine,” the website entry says.
Regarding the Degas’ paintings, Shvydkoy said that “cultural, bureaucratic London justified its decision on the basis of its own ideas about beauty and the stance of the Ukrainian diaspora in the United Kingdom”, the outlet reported.
The dispute, Shvydkoy notes, could now travel farther into literature, pointing to Russian poet Alexander Pushkin’s African ancestry, Mikhail Lermontov’s Scottish ancestry and German philosopher Immanuel Kant’s birthplace in Königsberg, now Kaliningrad, once a German city but later part of the Soviet Union and now of the Russian Federation.
At least some of reattributions are credited to Oksana Semenik, formerly a researcher at Rutgers University in New Jersey, who was in the Kyiv suburb of Bucha last March when it was attacked by Russian forces.
Semenik began a campaign to correct attributions of artists listed as Russian in the university collection that she considered Ukrainian. “I realized that a lot of Ukrainian artists were in the Russian collection. Of 900 so-called Russian artists, 70 were Ukrainians and 18 were from other countries,” she told CNN.
Semenik found a similar pattern at major US institutions. She complained and received noncommittal responses. “Then I got really mad,” she told the outlet. Semenik, who has since returned to Ukraine, was not immediately available for comment.
One person involved in the campaign told the Guardian that they had heard some institutions had come under pressure to maintain Russian attributions from the wives of oligarchs who sit on museum boards.
How far the campaign can go in reattributing Russian artists as Ukrainian, in some cases, is an issue better assigned to art scholarship than to whim of political gesture, given that it has long experience in reattributing works assigned to artists, or artists of certain nationalities, as more becomes known.
“As with so many rational decisions, making it more accurate also brings confusion,” notes Charles Stuckey, who has served as curator in major US museums including the Art Institute of Chicago.
“Museums change titles of their works all the time based upon investigations,” Stuckey said. “The timing is suspicious. Are they just dong this at this particular time?”
For the Degas titles to have been changed, he says, “someone would have had to have shown the Degas specialists that they hadn’t been as precise as they could have been over all those years”.
At the same time, he points out, it is unlikely that someone passing by the work who happened to be a specialist on costumes circa 1900 could say, “well, not exactly Russian, more likely Ukrainian” and convince curators on that basis.
“It has to be backed up by some kind of rational to make the change. The field is already very familiar with situations like this because of reattributions of old master art. It does slightly complicate research but so what?”
_________________
С сожалением и понятными пожеланиями, Dimitriy.
Как не жаль, а «ВВС» действительно права, статью Путина в «Жэньмин жибао» а.п. найти не удалось. Чего нельзя сказать о статье Си Цзиньпина. Нехорошо получается, нехорошо.
Цитата:
Цитата:
Путин написал благодарственную статью в официальном органе ЦК Компартии Китая
Газета "Жэньмин жибао", официальный орган ЦК Коммунистической партии Китая, опубликовала статью Владимира Путина "Россия и Китай - партнерство, устремленное в будущее" (так сообщает сайт Кремля: только там на данный момент можно прочитать эту статью, хотя у газеты есть русская версия).
...
Цитата:
Статья Владимира Путина в «Жэньминь Жибао» «Россия и Китай – партнёрство, устремлённое в будущее»
...
Мы познакомились с товарищем Си Цзиньпином в марте 2010 года, когда он приезжал в Москву во главе представительной китайской делегации. Наша первая встреча прошла очень по-деловому и в то же время искренне и доброжелательно. Такой стиль общения мне лично глубоко импонирует. Знаю, что в Китае уделяют большое значение дружбе и человеческим взаимоотношениям. Неслучайно мудрец Конфуций сказал: «Разве это не радость, когда издалека приезжает друг!» Мы в России также высоко ценим эти качества, для нас настоящий друг – как родной брат. В этом наши народы очень схожи.
…
Три года спустя, примерно в те же мартовские дни, мы вновь встретились в столице России. Тогда Си Цзиньпин посетил нашу страну с первым государственным визитом после избрания на пост Председателя КНР. Тот саммит задал тон и динамику российско-китайским отношениям на многие годы, стал ярким свидетельством особого характера отношений России и Китая, определил вектор их ускоренного и устойчивого развития.
…
Мы с Председателем Си Цзиньпином встречались около 40 раз и всегда находили время и возможность для общения и в самых разных официальных форматах, и в обстановке «без галстуков».
Одним из наших приоритетов является торгово-экономическое партнёрство. По итогам 2022 года и без того солидный двусторонний товарооборот удвоился и достиг 185 миллиардов долларов. Это – новый рекорд. И у нас есть все основания полагать, что поставленная нами с Председателем Си Цзиньпином планка в 200 миллиардов долларов будет превышена не в 2024-м, а уже в нынешнем году. При этом важно, что во взаимной торговле растёт доля расчётов в национальных валютах и наши отношения становятся ещё более суверенными.
Успешно реализуются долгосрочные совместные планы и программы. Например, российско-китайский магистральный газопровод «Сила Сибири» по своим масштабам без преувеличения стал «сделкой века». Существенно выросли объёмы поставок отечественной нефти и угля. С участием наших специалистов в Китае строятся новые атомные энергоблоки, китайские компании активно подключаются к СПГ-проектам, крепнет промышленная и сельскохозяйственная кооперация. Мы вместе осваиваем космическое пространство, развиваем новые технологии.
…
Россия открыта к политико-дипломатическому урегулированию украинского кризиса. Однако ещё в апреле 2022 года мирные переговоры были прекращены отнюдь не нами. Будущее мирного процесса зависит исключительно от готовности к серьёзному разговору с учётом сложившихся геополитических реалий. К сожалению, ультимативные требования в адрес России говорят лишь об оторванности от таких реалий и незаинтересованности в поиске выхода из сложившейся ситуации.
При этом спровоцированный и старательно подогреваемый Западом кризис на Украине – самое яркое на сегодня, но отнюдь не единственное проявление намерений сохранить доминирование на международной арене и однополярный миропорядок. Нельзя не понимать, что НАТО пытается придать своей деятельности глобальный охват, нацелившись на проникновение в Азиатско-Тихоокеанский регион. Что некоторые силы настойчиво стремятся раздробить общеевразийское пространство на сеть «эксклюзивных клубов» и военных блоков, направленных на сдерживание развития наших стран, на ущемление их интересов. Однако добиться этого никому не удастся.
Именно российско-китайские отношения сегодня фактически выступают краеугольным камнем региональной, да и глобальной стабильности, стимулируют экономический рост, служат гарантом позитивной повестки в международных делах. Они – образец гармоничного созидательного сотрудничества между крупными державами.
...
Цитата:
Си Цзиньпин: упорно двигаться к новым перспективам дружбы Китая и России
…
East Turkistanis Demand Xi Jinping’s Arrest After ICC Issues Putin Warrant
...
WASHINGTON: The International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin for war crimes on March 17, 2023, holding him personally responsible for the abduction of Ukrainian children.
The
East Turkistan Government in Exile
and the
East Turkistan National Movement
are requesting that the
ICC
accept their July 2020 complaint and
arrest Chinese leader Xi Jinping for genocide and other crimes against humanity
committed against Uyghur and other Turkic peoples in East Turkistan (so-called “Xinjiang”).
“We call on the International Criminal Court to act and hold Chinese leader Xi Jinping accountable for the ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity against Uyghurs and other Turkic people in East Turkistan,”
said Prime Minister Salih Hudayar of the East Turkistan Government in Exile.
“The International Criminal Court must uphold justice and fulfill its commitment to ‘Never Again’ by investigating the ongoing genocide and arresting Xi Jinping for his direct role in this Holocaust-like genocide in the 21st century,”
he added.
In 2014, Chinese President Xi Jinping gave secret directives, (the New York Times reported in 2019), instructing the Chinese government and the Chinese communist Party to show
“absolutely no mercy”
and target Uyghurs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, and other Turkic peoples with the
“organs of dictatorship.”
Xi’s directives have resulted in an extensive ongoing campaign of
mass internment, forced labor, forced sterilization, forced marriages, and forced family separation
against Turkic ethnic groups in East Turkistan, which has been officially designated as
genocide
by the U.S. government and the Parliaments of nearly a dozen western nations since 2021.
In June 2021, lawyers representing the ETGE and ETNM submitted additional evidence to the ICC that the Chinese Government is implementing a policy of rounding up Uyghur and other ethnically Turkic people from outside China, including ICC member States such as neighboring Tajikistan, and forcefully deporting them back to East Turkistan (so-called “Xinjiang”), where they are subjected to genocidal acts and crimes against humanity. The new evidence highlighted that upwards of 3,000 Uyghurs had been forcibly deported from Tajikistan with an additional
4,000 from Kyrgyzstan.
In addition to the
mass interment of over 3 million Uyghurs, Kazakhs, and other Turkic peoples, over 880,500 Uyghur and other Turkic children have been forcibly separated from their families and put into state-run interment facilities for indoctrination
, which is officially described as “boarding schools and orphanages.”
In September 2022, the
United Nations released a report stating China is committing “grave human rights violations” against Uyghurs and other Turkic peoples which “may constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity.”
"Вырвано из контекста". Посольство Польши во Франции опровергло готовность Варшавы вступить в войну с Россией
...
"В ходе получасовой беседы с редактором посол утверждал о необходимости поддержки Украины союзниками. Он также рассказал об угрозе, которую Россия представляет для Европы и европейских ценностей", - говорится в заявлении посольства Польши в Париже.
По словам посольства, "тщательное прослушивание всего разговора позволяет понять, что не было никакого объявления о прямом участии Польши в войне, а только предупреждение о последствиях, которые может иметь поражение Украины - возможность России атаковать или вовлечь в войну страны Балтии и Польшу".
...
Цитата:
"Если Украина не защитит свой суверенитет". В Польше заявили о готовности вступить в войну с Россией
...
Польша вступит в прямой конфликт с Россией, если Украина не защитит свой суверенитет.
Об этом заявил посол Польши во Франции Ян Эмерик Ростишевский французскому телеканалу LCI.
"Если Украина не сможет отстоять свою независимость, у нас не будет выбора, мы будем вынуждены вступить в конфликт", - сказал он.
...
Blinken Says Xi’s Visit to Moscow Offers ‘Diplomatic Cover’ for Putin’s War Crimes
...
Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken on Monday said that the visit to Moscow by China’s president days after the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir V. Putin, amounts to Beijing providing “diplomatic cover for Russia to continue to commit” war crimes.
President Xi Jinping’s visit “suggests that China feels no responsibility to hold the president accountable for the atrocities committed in Ukraine,” Mr. Blinken said of Mr. Putin.
Mr. Blinken made the remark during a longer criticism of the role China has sought to take in the war by offering a vague plan for peace talks that Kyiv and its Western allies have brushed off. He warned against any efforts to settle the conflict that might lead to an “unjust outcome” or offer Russia a chance to gain a tactical advantage in the fighting.
…
Mr. Blinken said he expected China to use Mr. Xi’s trip to reiterate its past calls for a cease-fire under the 12-point peace proposal that China presented last month. But he expressed deep skepticism about the Chinese efforts, saying that a call for a cease-fire that does not include the removal of Russian forces from Ukraine “would effectively be supporting the ratification of Russian conquest,” he said. “It would recognize Russia’s attempts to seize a sovereign neighbor’s territory by force.”
He said that the U.S. would welcome any peace initiative for Ukraine “that advances a just and durable peace,” and supports elements of China’s proposal, including the protection of civilians and ensuring nuclear safety.
But the fundamental element of any plan to end the fighting must be “upholding the sovereignty and territory of Ukraine,” he said, adding, “Any plan that does not prioritize this critical principle is a stalling tactic at best, or is merely seeking to facilitate an unjust outcome.”
He said that Mr. Putin’s efforts to annex Ukrainian territory and his military’s ongoing attacks on civilians prove that Mr. Putin “has no interest” in such a peace.
Цитата:
Цитата:
Собрали заявления Владимира Путина на встрече с председателем КНР Си Цзиньпином:
• Китай за последние годы сделал колоссальный рывок в своем развитии, "мы даже немножко вам завидуем";
• Под руководством Си Цзиньпина Китай продолжит развиваться и добиваться поставленных целей;
• У России и Китая много совместных задач и целей;
• РФ внимательно ознакомилась с китайским планом мирного урегулирования на Украине;
• Россия с уважением относится к инициативам Китая по мирному урегулированию на Украине;
• Отношения Москвы и Пекина способствуют укреплению многополярности в мире.
Президент Чехии: У ВСУ будет только одна попытка крупного контрнаступления
...
«Как бывший военный офицер, я, однако, реалист. Мы должны сделать все возможное, чтобы поддержать Украину в достижении ее целей. Если целью является возвращение всех территорий, это было бы прекрасным результатом этой войны. Однако, если Украина, несмотря на всю необходимую помощь Запада, не сможет вернуть себе всю территорию, а Россия в то же время будет достаточно сильна, чтобы контролировать ее, результатом, вероятно, станет затяжная война на истощение, без возможности прогресса с обеих сторон. Такой сценарий – не то, чего мы хотим, но мы должны принять во внимание, что он существует. Мы не можем делать вид, что полный успех является единственным возможным решением», – подчеркнул Петр Павел.
Президент Чехии отметил, что сам он никогда бы не призвал Украину отдать часть своей территории, пойти на какие-то уступки. «Если украинцы когда-нибудь решат это сделать, это будет только их решение. Мы не должны подталкивать Киев в каком-либо направлении, не должны призывать их идти на уступки или сражаться до последнего солдата. Мы можем поддерживать украинцев, насколько это возможно, но мы не можем давать им планы на будущее. Мы можем лишь оказать им помощь», – отметил он.
Поэтому на вопрос газеты Rzeczpospolita, сколько времени есть у украинцев для начала крупного контрнаступления, чтобы вытеснить россиян со своей территории, Петр Павел ответил, что это должно произойти в течение нескольких месяцев. «Окно возможностей открыто в этом году. После следующей зимы будет крайне сложно поддерживать нынешний уровень помощи. Усталость от войны – это не только истощение человеческих ресурсов и техники, разрушение инфраструктуры в Украине, но и усталость в странах, которые оказывают помощь. Многие страны, многие политики ожидают какого-то прогресса в этом году. Я думаю, что у Украины будет только одна попытка провести крупное контрнаступление. Поэтому, если она решит провести крупное контрнаступление и потерпит неудачу, то получить финансирование на следующее будет крайне сложно», – оценил президент Чехии.
В УПЦ рассказали, что будет делать Церковь после истечения обозначенного властями срока ухода из Лавры
...
"Наши действия будут в соответствии с законодательством Украины. На сегодняшний день нет законных оснований чтобы монахи УПЦ выезжали из Киево-Печерской Лавры. В тоже время мы думаем, что буду совершаться незаконные действия со стороны определенных чиновников. Поэтому мы будем делать все, чтобы 29 марта конституционные права верующих УПЦ не были нарушены",- заявил Климент.
Он также прокомментировал, сообщение о том, что монахи Киево-Печерской-Лавры вывозят часть своих вещей с территории монастыря.
"Мы сейчас проводим некоторые мероприятия на случай, если монахи не смогут находится в Лавре. Сейчас они вывозят свои личные вещи. И когда монастырь вновь будет в Лавре, то они туда вернутся", - заявил Климент.
...
Цитата:
"Нам очень жаль". В УПЦ отреагировали на отсутствие у Зеленского планов встретиться с представителями Церкви
...
"Нам очень жаль, что государство избегает прямого контакта и диалога со значительной частью украинского народа которая являются верующими УПЦ. Нам очень жаль, что государство артикулирует искаженные факты про Украинскую православную церковь. Обвиняет УПЦ во всех грехах и при этом не находит возможности объяснить свою позицию и сделать все, чтобы развивался диалог между церковью и государством Украина", - заявил "Стране" владыка Климент.
...
Цитата:
У Зеленского на сегодня не запланирована встреча с представителями УПЦ - Никифоров
...
"С делегацией встретились сотрудники профильных департаментов Офиса президента, чтобы получить обращение, зарегистрировать его и передать для дальнейшего рассмотрения. По состоянию на данный момент представители УПЦ МП такое обращение передавать отказались", - сообщил Никифоров.
Тем временем, к представителям Синода УПЦ, которые находятся у входа в Офис президента на Банковой вышла представительница департамента внутренней и гуманитарной политики ОП и заявила, что ее уполномочили принять обращение Синода.
Но члены Синода повторили свое требование, что хотят лично встретится с президентом Владимиром Зеленским и передать обращение ему.
"Скоро выйдет солнце, так что мы до вечера будем здесь стоять",- заявил один из иерархов УПЦ.
...
Цитата:
Из Киево-Печерской лавры вывозят вещи, часть библиотеки роздана прихожанам — источник СМИ.
Уровень доступа: Вы не можете начинать темы, Вы не можете отвечать на сообщения, Вы не можете редактировать свои сообщения, Вы не можете удалять свои сообщения, Вы не можете голосовать в опросах
На формирующиеся тренды этого года оказало влияние два макрофактора. С одной стороны — это развитие «старых» тенденций, фундамент которым был заложен еще в период пандемии. Условно назовем их «цифровыми». С другой — это новые явления, сформировавшиеся в результате СВО. Для рынка именно они оказались наиболее значимыми.
Призывы к срочной покупке, демонстрация превосходства товара и сленг. Как выяснили аналитики компании Calltouch, именно это больше всего раздражает россиян в рекламе. Впрочем, такие приемы все равно работают и клиенты совершают покупки, уверены опрошенные "Ъ FM" маркетологи.
Социологи из Института статистических исследований и экономики знаний Высшей школы экономики опубликовали исследование «российского креативного класса», которое назвали портретом в цифрах.
Глобальный тренд в рекламном бизнесе – отрасль начала активно меняться. Основные изменения касаются пересмотров кампаний в сторону увеличения их эффективности и новый подход к формированию контента. Весь прошлый год эксперты рынка дискутировали, станет ли фатальным для рекламных агентств отток западных рекламодателей. Ожидали, что для многих этот факт повлечет экономические ямы вплоть до банкротства. Но этого не случилось, агентства продолжают работать в новых условиях. На фоне затишья в отрасли в прошлом году, можно попробовать прогнозировать наращивание объемом в 2023. Рекламный рынок откликается на рынок общеэкономический, а в нем глобального провала не случилось. И хотя прогнозы дело неблагодарное, ждем активности на рекламном рынке.
Запрет на употребление иностранных слов вызвал бурное обсуждение. В результате некоторые стали придумывать замены самых часто употребляемых англицизмов.
Чего не хватает радио, чтобы увеличить свою долю на рекламном рынке? Аудиопиратство: угроза или возможности для отрасли? Каковы первые результаты общероссийской кампании по продвижению индустриального радиоплеера? Эти и другие вопросы были рассмотрены на конференции «Радио в глобальной медиаконкуренции», спикерами и участниками которой стали эксперты ГПМ Радио.
Деловая программа 28-й международной специализированной выставки технологий и услуг для производителей и заказчиков рекламы «Реклама-2021» открылась десятым юбилейным форумом «Матрица рекламы». Его организовали КВК «Империя» и «Экспоцентр».
28 марта в Центральном доме художника состоялась 25-ая выставка маркетинговых коммуникаций «Дизайн и реклама NEXT». Одним из самых ярких её событий стал День социальной рекламы, который организовала Ассоциация директоров по коммуникациям и корпоративным медиа России (АКМР) совместно с АНО «Лаборатория социальной рекламы» и оргкомитетом LIME.
На VII Международном форуме «Матрица рекламы», прошедшем в ЦВК «Экспоцентр» в рамках международной выставки «Реклама-2018», большой интерес у профессиональной аудитории вызвала VI Конференция «Интернет-реклама».
RSS