Thursday, April 17, 2014

'Broke' U.N. Agency Pleads For Help In Central African Republic
French soldiers escorting Muslims out of the Central African Republic during
March 2014.
Wed, Apr 16 2014
By Tom Miles

GENEVA (Reuters) - Inter-communal violence is tearing Central African Republic apart but the conflict is not getting the attention, or aid, needed to save huge numbers of lives, the head of the U.N. refugee agency (UNHCR) said on Wednesday.

Almost 200,000 people have fled the country since December, and a further 160,000 are expected to this year. The UNHCR says it is spending cash there three times as fast as new funds are coming in, putting its mission in jeopardy.

"Indeed, we are in trouble," UNHCR chief Antonio Guterres told diplomats as he launched a $274 million appeal.

Central African Republic is only one crisis among many demanding U.N. funds stretched by humanitarian needs in South Sudan, Somalia and Yemen, as well as natural disasters such as Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines, and above all, Syria.

"Obviously there's no way we'll to be able to sustain this until the end of the year," Guterres told the diplomats. "At a certain moment we will be simply broke."

Central African Republic's government fell a year ago to Muslim Seleka rebels who were routed in December by Christian militia forces, unleashing anarchy and ethnic cleansing.

"When you start cutting people into pieces and roasting them," Guterres told reporters, "It's not an army against an army - it's people doing horrible things to their neighbors."

But the crisis has no major economic or strategic repercussions beyond the country's immediate neighbors, he said, so it gets little attention from the outside world.

"People do not feel threatened. People feel threatened with Syria, people feel threatened with Ukraine and what might happen. Even Somalia. But in relation to the Central African Republic people don't feel threatened, don't know where it is, it's very difficult, they've never heard about it."


Diplomats at the meeting were effusive in their support but only Japan's ambassador pledged actual financial aid, and even he admitted to being not well informed on the subject.

"What I heard today is much more dramatic than I had imagined before I came to this chamber," Ambassador Takashi Okada said.

The U.N. appeal included a gallery of photographs of wounded and malnourished refugees arriving in Cameroon, but the official chairing the meeting said they were too "heart-wrenching" to inflict on the diplomats, who were invited to stay behind afterwards if they wanted to view them. About half left.

Although the U.N. Security Council last week authorized the creation of a nearly 12,000-strong U.N. peacekeeping force, it is not due to be in place until mid-September.

William Lacy Swing, head of the International Organization for Migration and a former U.S. ambassador to Central African Republic, said the country could not wait, and the current French and African Union forces were not big enough.

"The number 1 priority is to stop the fighting. You will not arrive at that without the (U.N.) blue helmets," said Swing. "Unfortunately September's a long time away. A lot of people are going to die before that force can be assembled and deployed."

The first priority had to be to secure the capital Bangui, creating "zones of peace" to bring people out of 70 or more "spontaneous settlements around town where people are hunkered down hoping to avoid being killed", he said.

(Editing by Stephanie Nebehay and Robin Pomeroy)
22 Reported Killed in Clashes Over Central African Republic Town
Muslims fleeing the Central African Republic in March 2014.
Wed, Apr 16 2014
By Crispin Dembassa-Kette

BANGUI (Reuters) - At least 22 people, mainly civilians, were killed in clashes between mainly Muslim rebels and Christian militia in the Central African Republic earlier this week, the local Red Cross said on Wednesday.

The clashes took place on Monday in Grimari, about 300 km (190 miles) northeast of Bangui, and coincide with a push into the interior by French and African forces struggling to contain violence that experts warn has pushed the country to the verge of genocide.

"There are 22 dead, four of whom were women killed by stray bullets," Michel Sefionam, head of Grimari's medical center and a member of the local Red Cross, told Reuters by telephone.

Violence between Muslims and Christian simmers despite the deployment of 2,000 French and over 5,000 African peacekeepers, and international pressure which forced Seleka rebels to abandon the capital they seized in a rebellion last year.

Abuses during Seleka's nine-month rule triggered reprisal killings by local militia. The cycles of violence have forced nearly a million people from their homes and raised the prospect that the country could be split in two as Seleka retreat north.

"There were five Seleka and two 'anti-balaka' killed. Most of the (other) people killed were civilians," Sefionam said of the violence in Grimari.

There were conflicting versions of both the origins and the outcome of the fighting in Grimari.
Sefionam said most of the town's population had fled into the bush or were sheltering in the Catholic mission, leaving some French soldiers and a handful of Seleka fighters in the streets.

Wendy Rappeport, a spokeswoman for the Africa office at the U.N. Refugee Agency, UNHCR, said anti-balaka forces appeared to have taken the town from Seleka.

Captain Ahmat Nidjad Ibrahim, a senior Seleka officer in the region, said his forces had killed 95 enemy fighters and lost one in clashes since April 11.

Ibrahim said anti-balaka fighters had attacked Seleka positions in the town as French troops approached.

A French defense ministry spokesman said French troops had reported worsening tensions between Seleka and anti-balaka fighters in Grimari but he was not able to confirm any toll.

"What we are trying to do is to contain the violence," he said.


Paris rushed troops to its former colony last December as an African peacekeeping mission failed to prevent violence from spiraling out of control and anti-balaka fighters mounted an assault on Bangui in a bid to oust Seleka from power.

French troops were meant to quickly secure the capital and then move up-country but Paris has admitted it underestimated the levels of violence it would face.

Complicating matters, Chadian troops, at the heart of the African peacekeeping force, have left the country after being accused of abuses and siding with Seleka.

The United Nations Security Council last week authorized the creation of a nearly 12,000-strong U.N. peacekeeping force in the Central African Republic in a bid to end the violence, although it is not due to be deployed until mid-September.

In the meantime, as the weak transitional government fails to prevent a de-facto split between a Christian south and a Muslim north, many are frustrated at the inability of foreign troops to restore order.

"We wonder what the (French) have really come to do here and why they did not intervene?" Sefionam, the health worker, asked.

(Additional reporting by Nicholas Vinocur and Tom Miles; Writing by David Lewis; Editing by Andrew Roche)

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Twenty Years Ago Washington Was Behind the Genocide: Rwanda, Installing a US Proxy State in Central Africa
Rwandan President Paul Kagame with protocol officer Rose Kabuye. She was
arrested in Germany and threatened with extradition to France. She was eventually
released by Germany.
Michel Chossudovsky
Monday, April 7, 2014, 21:24 Beijing

Author’s note: The following article was originally written in May 2000, published on Global Research in May 2003, the following text is Part II of Chapter 7 entitled “Economic Genocide in Rwanda”, Second Edition of The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order , Global Research, 2003.

The world  is currently commemorating the 20th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide. The official story is that the genocide directed against the Tutsi population was triggered by the Interhamwe militia of the Habyarimana government in the wake of the plane crash which led to the death of president Habyarimana. The evidence suggests that the United States played a covert role in shooting down the plane.

The geopolitics underlying the Rwandan genocide should be understood.

Whereas France was accused of supporting the Habyarimana government. the United States played an undercover role in triggering the genocide.

The ultimate objective was to displace France from Central Africa. It is worth noting that that a similar situation is unfolding in the Central African republic which historically has been an area of French influence. Ethnic divisions between Christians and Muslims are being fomented the ultimate objective is to establish a US proxy states in the Central African republic.

The 1994 Rwandan “genocide” served strictly strategic and geopolitical objectives. The ethnic massacres were a stumbling blow to France’s credibility which enabled the US to establish a neocolonial foothold in Central Africa. From a distinctly Franco-Belgian colonial setting, the Rwandan capital Kigali has become –under the expatriate Tutsi led RPF government– distinctly Anglo-American. English has become the dominant language in government and the private sector. Many private businesses owned by Hutus were taken over in 1994 by returning Tutsi expatriates. The latter had been exiled in Anglophone Africa, the US and Britain.

The Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA) functions in English and Kinyarwanda, the University previously linked to France and Belgium functions in English. While English had become an official language alongside French and Kinyarwanda, French political and cultural influence will eventually be erased. Washington has become the new colonial master of a francophone country.

In the words of former Cooperation Minister Bernard Debré in the government of France’s Prime Minister Henri Balladur:

“What one forgets to say is that, if France was on one side, the Americans were on the other, arming the Ugandans, who armed the Tutsis. I don’t want to portray a showdown between the French and the Anglo-Saxons, but the truth must be told.”

Michel Chossudovsky, April 6, 2014

*      *     *

Rwanda, Installing a US Protectorate in Central Africa. The US was Behind the Rwanda Genocide

by Michel Chossudovsky

First  published in May 2000, posted by Global Research May 2003

The civil war in Rwanda and the ethnic massacres were an integral part of US foreign policy, carefully staged in accordance with precise strategic and economic objectives.

From the outset of the Rwandan civil war in 1990, Washington’s hidden agenda consisted in establishing an American sphere of influence in a region historically dominated by France and Belgium. America’s design was to displace France by supporting the Rwandan Patriotic Front and by arming and equipping its military arm, the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA)

From the mid-1980s, the Kampala government under President Yoweri Museveni had become Washington’s African showpiece of “democracy”. Uganda had also become a launchpad for US sponsored guerilla movements into the Sudan, Rwanda and the Congo. Major General Paul Kagame had been head of military intelligence in the Ugandan Armed Forces; he had been trained at the U.S. Army Command and Staff College (CGSC) in Leavenworth, Kansas which focuses on warfighting and military strategy. Kagame returned from Leavenworth to lead the RPA, shortly after the 1990 invasion.

Prior to the outbreak of the Rwandan civil war, the RPA was part of the Ugandan Armed Forces. Shortly prior to the October 1990 invasion of Rwanda, military labels were switched. From one day to the next, large numbers of Ugandan soldiers joined the ranks of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA). Throughout the civil war, the RPA was supplied from United People’s Defense Forces (UPDF) military bases inside Uganda. The Tutsi commissioned officers in the Ugandan army took over positions in the RPA. The October 1990 invasion by Ugandan forces was presented to public opinion as a war of liberation by a Tutsi led guerilla army.

Militarization of Uganda

The militarization of Uganda was an integral part of US foreign policy. The build-up of the Ugandan UPDF Forces and of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA) had been supported by the US and Britain. The British had provided military training at the Jinja military base:

“From 1989 onwards, America supported joint RPF [Rwandan Patriotic Front]-Ugandan attacks upon Rwanda… There were at least 56 ‘situation reports’ in [US] State Department files in 1991… As American and British relations with Uganda and the RPF strengthened, so hostilities between Uganda and Rwanda escalated… By August 1990 the RPF had begun preparing an invasion with the full knowledge and approval of British intelligence.

Troops from Rwanda’s RPA and Uganda’s UPDF had also supported John Garang’s People’s Liberation Army in its secessionist war in southern Sudan. Washington was firmly behind these initiatives with covert support provided by the CIA.

Moreover, under the Africa Crisis Reaction Initiative (ACRI),Ugandan officers were also being trained by US Special Forces in collaboration with a mercenary outfit, Military Professional Resources Inc (MPRI) which was on contract with the US Department of State. MPRI had provided similar training to the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) and the Croatian Armed Forces during the Yugoslav civil war and more recently to the Colombian Military in the context of Plan Colombia.

Militarization and the Ugandan External Debt

The buildup of the Ugandan external debt under President Museveni coincided chronologically with the Rwandan and Congolese civil wars. With the accession of Museveni to the presidency in 1986, the Ugandan external debt stood at 1.3 billion dollars. With the gush of fresh money, the external debt spiraled overnight, increasing almost threefold to 3.7 billion by 1997. In fact, Uganda had no outstanding debt to the World Bank at the outset of its “economic recovery program”. By 1997, it owed almost 2 billion dollars solely to the World Bank.

Where did the money go? The foreign loans to the Museveni government had been tagged to support the country’s economic and social reconstruction. In the wake of a protracted civil war, the IMF sponsored “economic stabilization program” required massive budget cuts of all civilian programs.

The World Bank was responsible for monitoring the Ugandan budget on behalf of the creditors. Under the “public expenditure review” (PER), the government was obliged to fully reveal the precise allocation of its budget. In other words, every single category of expenditure –including the budget of the Ministry of Defense– was open to scrutiny by the World Bank. Despite the austerity measures (imposed solely on “civilian” expenditures), the donors had allowed defense spending to increase without impediment.

Part of the money tagged for civilian programs had been diverted into funding the United People’s Defense Force (UPDF) which in turn was involved in military operations in Rwanda and the Congo. The Ugandan external debt was being used to finance these military operations on behalf of Washington with the country and its people ultimately footing the bill. In fact by curbing social expenditures, the austerity measures had facilitated the reallocation of State of revenue in favor of the Ugandan military.

Paul Kagame, “Our Kind of Guy”: Financing Both Sides in the Civil War

A similar process of financing military expenditure from the external debt had occurred in Rwanda under the Habyarimana government. In a cruel irony, both sides in the civil war were financed by the same donors institutions with the World Bank acting as a Watchdog.

The Habyarimana regime had at its disposal an arsenal of military equipment, including 83mm missile launchers, French made Blindicide, Belgian and German made light weaponry, and automatic weapons such as kalachnikovs made in Egypt, China and South Africa [as well as ... armored AML-60 and M3 armored vehicles. While part of these purchases had been financed by direct military aid from France, the influx of development loans from the World Bank's soft lending affiliate the International Development Association (IDA), the African Development Fund (AFD), the European Development Fund (EDF) as well as from Germany, the United States, Belgium and Canada had been diverted into funding the military and Interhamwe militia.

A detailed investigation of government files, accounts and correspondence conducted in Rwanda in 1996-97 by the author --together with Belgian economist Pierre Galand-- confirmed that many of the arms purchases had been negotiated outside the framework of government to government military aid agreements through various intermediaries and private arms dealers. These transactions --recorded as bona fide government expenditures-- had nonetheless been included in the State budget which was under the supervision of the World Bank. Large quantities of machetes and other items used in the 1994 ethnic massacres --routinely classified as "civilian commodities" -- had been imported through regular trading channels.

According to the files of the National Bank of Rwanda (NBR), some of these imports had been financed in violation of agreements signed with the donors. According to NBR records of import invoices, approximately one million machetes had been imported through various channels including Radio Mille Collines, an organization linked to the Interhamwe militia and used to foment ethnic hatred.

The money had been earmarked by the donors to support Rwanda's economic and social development. It was clearly stipulated that funds could not be used to import: "military expenditures on arms, ammunition and other military material".  In fact, the loan agreement with the World Bank's IDA was even more stringent. The money could not be used to import civilian commodities such as fuel, foodstuffs, medicine, clothing and footwear "destined for military or paramilitary use". The records of the NBR nonetheless confirm that the Habyarimana government used World Bank money to finance the import of machetes which had been routinely classified as imports of "civilian commodities."

An army of consultants and auditors had been sent in by the World Bank to assess the Habyarimana government's "policy performance" under the loan agreement. The use of donor funds to import machetes and other material used in the massacres of civilians did not show up in the independent audit commissioned by the government and the World Bank. (under the IDA loan agreement. (IDA Credit Agreement. 2271-RW). In 1993, the World Bank decided to suspend the disbursement of the second installment of its IDA loan. There had been, according to the World Bank mission unfortunate "slip-ups" and "delays" in policy implementation. The free market reforms were no longer "on track", the conditionalities --including the privatization of state assets-- had not been met. The fact that the country was involved in a civil war was not even mentioned. How the money was spent was never an issue.

Whereas the World Bank had frozen the second installment (tranche) of the IDA loan, the money granted in 1991 had been deposited in a Special Account at the Banque Bruxelles Lambert in Brussels. This account remained open and accessible to the former regime (in exile), two months after the April 1994 ethnic massacres.

Postwar Cover-up

In the wake of the civil war, the World Bank sent a mission to Kigali with a view to drafting a so-called loan "Completion Report". This was a routine exercise, largely focusing on macro-economic rather than political issues. The report acknowledged that "the war effort prompted the [former] government to increase substantially spending, well beyond the fiscal targets agreed under the SAP.33 The misappropriation of World Bank money was not mentioned. Instead the Habyarimana government was praised for having “made genuine major efforts– especially in 1991– to reduce domestic and external financial imbalances, eliminate distortions hampering export growth and diversification and introduce market based mechanisms for resource allocation…”, The massacres of civilians were not mentioned; from the point of view of the donors, “nothing had happened”. In fact the World Bank completion report failed to even acknowledge the existence of a civil war prior to April 1994.

In the wake of the Civil War: Reinstating the IMF’s Deadly Economic Reforms

In 1995, barely a year after the 1994 ethnic massacres. Rwanda’s external creditors entered into discussions with the Tutsi led RPF government regarding the debts of the former regime which had been used to finance the massacres. The RPF decided to fully recognize the legitimacy of the “odious debts” of the 1990-94. RPF strongman Vice-President Paul Kagame [now President] instructed the Cabinet not to pursue the matter nor to approach the World Bank. Under pressure from Washington, the RPF was not to enter into any form of negotiations, let alone an informal dialogue with the donors.

The legitimacy of the wartime debts was never questioned. Instead, the creditors had carefully set up procedures to ensure their prompt reimbursement. In 1998 at a special donors’ meeting in Stockholm, a Multilateral Trust Fund of 55.2 million dollars was set up under the banner of postwar reconstruction. In fact, none of this money was destined for Rwanda. It had been earmarked to service Rwanda’s “odious debts” with the World Bank (–i.e. IDA debt), the African Development Bank and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).

In other words, “fresh money” –which Rwanda will eventually have to reimburse– was lent to enable Rwanda to service the debts used to finance the massacres. Old loans had been swapped for new debts under the banner of post-war reconstruction. The “odious debts” had been whitewashed, they had disappeared from the books. The creditor’s responsibility had been erased. Moreover, the scam was also conditional upon the acceptance of a new wave of IMF-World Bank reforms.

Post War “Reconstruction and Reconciliation”

Bitter economic medicine was imposed under the banner of “reconstruction and reconciliation”. In fact the IMF post-conflict reform package was far stringent than that imposed at the outset of the civil war in 1990. While wages and employment had fallen to abysmally low levels, the IMF had demanded a freeze on civil service wages alongside a massive retrenchment of teachers and health workers. The objective was to “restore macro-economic stability”. A downsizing of the civil service was launched. Civil service wages were not to exceed 4.5 percent of GDP, so-called “unqualified civil servants” (mainly teachers) were to be removed from the State payroll.

Meanwhile, the country’s per capita income had collapsed from $360 (prior to the war) to $140 in 1995. State revenues had been tagged to service the external debt. Kigali’s Paris Club debts were rescheduled in exchange for “free market” reforms. Remaining State assets were sold off to foreign capital at bargain prices.

The Tutsi led RPF government rather than demanding the cancellation of Rwanda’s odious debts, had welcomed the Bretton Woods institutions with open arms. They needed the IMF “greenlight” to boost the development of the military.

Despite the austerity measures, defense expenditure continued to grow. The 1990-94 pattern had been reinstated. The development loans granted since 1995 were not used to finance the country’s economic and social development. Outside money had again been diverted into financing a military buildup, this time of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA). And this build-up of the RPA occurred in the period immediately preceding the outbreak of civil war in former Zaire.

Civil War in the Congo

Following the installation of a US client regime in Rwanda in 1994, US trained Rwandan and Ugandan forces intervened in former Zaire –a stronghold of French and Belgian influence under President Mobutu Sese Seko. Amply documented, US special operations troops — mainly Green Berets from the 3rd Special Forces Group based at Fort Bragg, N.C.– had been actively training the RPA. This program was a continuation of the covert support and military aid provided to the RPA prior to 1994. In turn, the tragic outcome of the Rwandan civil war including the refugee crisis had set the stage for the participation of Ugandan and Rwandan RPA in the civil war in the Congo:

“Washington pumped military aid into Kagame’s army, and U.S. Army Special Forces and other military personnel trained hundreds of Rwandan troops. But Kagame and his colleagues had designs of their own. While the Green Berets trained the Rwandan Patriotic Army, that army was itself secretly training Zairian rebels.… [In] Rwanda, U.S. officials publicly portrayed their engagement with the army as almost entirely devoted to human rights training. But the Special Forces exercises also covered other areas, including combat skills… Hundreds of soldiers and officers were enrolled in U.S. training programs, both in Rwanda and in the United States… [C]onducted by U.S. Special Forces, Rwandans studied camouflage techniques, small-unit movement, troop-leading procedures, soldier-team development, [etc]… And while the training went on, U.S. officials were meeting regularly with Kagame and other senior Rwandan leaders to discuss the continuing military threat faced by the [former Rwandan] government [in exile] from inside Zaire… Clearly, the focus of Rwandan-U.S. military discussion had shifted from how to build human rights to how to combat an insurgency… With [Ugandan President] Museveni’s support, Kagame conceived a plan to back a rebel movement in eastern Zaire [headed by Laurent Desire Kabila] … The operation was launched in October 1996, just a few weeks after Kagame’s trip to Washington and the completion of the Special Forces training mission… Once the war [in the Congo] started, the United States provided “political assistance” to Rwanda,… An official of the U.S. Embassy in Kigali traveled to eastern Zaire numerous times to liaise with Kabila. Soon, the rebels had moved on. Brushing off the Zairian army with the help of the Rwandan forces, they marched through Africa’s third-largest nation in seven months, with only a few significant military engagements. Mobutu fled the capital, Kinshasa, in May 1997, and Kabila took power, changing the name of the country to Congo…U.S. officials deny that there were any U.S. military personnel with Rwandan troops in Zaire during the war, although unconfirmed reports of a U.S. advisory presence have circulated in the region since the war’s earliest days.

American Mining Interests

At stake in these military operations in the Congo were the extensive mining resources of Eastern and Southern Zaire including strategic reserves of cobalt — of crucial importance for the US defense industry. During the civil war several months before the downfall of Mobutu, Laurent Desire Kabila based in Goma, Eastern Zaire had renegotiated the mining contracts with several US and British mining companies including American Mineral Fields (AMF), a company headquartered in President Bill Clinton’s hometown of Hope, Arkansas.

Meanwhile back in Washington, IMF officials were busy reviewing Zaire’s macro-economic situation. No time was lost. The post-Mobutu economic agenda had already been decided upon. In a study released in April 1997 barely a month before President Mobutu Sese Seko fled the country, the IMF had recommended “halting currency issue completely and abruptly” as part of an economic recovery programme. And a few months later upon assuming power in Kinshasa, the new government of Laurent Kabila Desire was ordered by the IMF to freeze civil service wages with a view to “restoring macro-economic stability.” Eroded by hyperinflation, the average public sector wage had fallen to 30,000 new Zaires (NZ) a month, the equivalent of one U.S. dollar.

The IMF’s demands were tantamount to maintaining the entire population in abysmal poverty. They precluded from the outset a meaningful post-war economic reconstruction, thereby contributing to fuelling the continuation of the Congolese civil war in which close to 2 million people have died.

Concluding Remarks

The civil war in Rwanda was a brutal struggle for political power between the Hutu-led Habyarimana government supported by France and the Tutsi Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) backed financially and militarily by Washington. Ethnic rivalries were used deliberately in the pursuit of geopolitical objectives. Both the CIA and French intelligence were involved.

In the words of former Cooperation Minister Bernard Debré in the government of France’s Prime Minister Henri Balladur:

“What one forgets to say is that, if France was on one side, the Americans were on the other, arming the Ugandans, who armed the Tutsis. I don’t want to portray a showdown between the French and the Anglo-Saxons, but the truth must be told.”

In addition to military aid to the warring factions, the influx of development loans played an important role in “financing the conflict.” In other words, both the Ugandan and Rwanda external debts were diverted into supporting the military and paramilitary. Uganda’s external debt increased by more than 2 billion dollars, –i.e. at a significantly faster pace than that of Rwanda (an increase of approximately 250 million dollars from 1990 to 1994). In retrospect, the RPA — financed by US military aid and Uganda’s external debt– was much better equipped and trained than the Forces Armées du Rwanda (FAR) loyal to President Habyarimana. From the outset, the RPA had a definite military advantage over the FAR.

According to the testimony of Paul Mugabe, a former member of the RPF High Command Unit, Major General Paul Kagame had personally ordered the shooting down of President Habyarimana’s plane with a view to taking control of the country. He was fully aware that the assassination of Habyarimana would unleash “a genocide” against Tutsi civilians. RPA forces had been fully deployed in Kigali at the time the ethnic massacres took place and did not act to prevent it from happening:

The decision of Paul Kagame to shoot Pres. Habyarimana’s aircraft was the catalyst of an unprecedented drama in Rwandan history, and Major-General Paul Kagame took that decision with all awareness. Kagame’s ambition caused the extermination of all of our families: Tutsis, Hutus and Twas. We all lost. Kagame’s take-over took away the lives of a large number of Tutsis and caused the unnecessary exodus of millions of Hutus, many of whom were innocent under the hands of the genocide ringleaders. Some naive Rwandans proclaimed Kagame as their savior, but time has demonstrated that it was he who caused our suffering and misfortunes… Can Kagame explain to the Rwandan people why he sent Claude Dusaidi and Charles Muligande to New York and Washington to stop the UN military intervention which was supposed to be sent and protect the Rwandan people from the genocide? The reason behind avoiding that military intervention was to allow the RPF leadership the takeover of the Kigali Government and to show the world that they – the RPF – were the ones who stopped the genocide. We will all remember that the genocide occurred during three months, even though Kagame has said that he was capable of stopping it the first week after the aircraft crash. Can Major-General Paul Kagame explain why he asked to MINUAR to leave Rwandan soil within hours while the UN was examining the possibility of increasing its troops in Rwanda in order to stop the genocide?

Paul Mugabe’s testimony regarding the shooting down of Habyarimana’s plane ordered by Kagame is corroborated by intelligence documents and information presented to the French parliamentary inquiry. Major General Paul Kagame was an instrument of Washington. The loss of African lives did not matter. The civil war in Rwanda and the ethnic massacres were an integral part of US foreign policy, carefully staged in accordance with precise strategic and economic objectives.

Despite the good diplomatic relations between Paris and Washington and the apparent unity of the Western military alliance, it was an undeclared war between France and America. By supporting the build up of Ugandan and Rwandan forces and by directly intervening in the Congolese civil war, Washington also bears a direct responsibility for the ethnic massacres committed in the Eastern Congo including several hundred thousand people who died in refugee camps.

US policy-makers were fully aware that a catastrophe was imminent. In fact four months before the genocide, the CIA had warned the US State Department in a confidential brief that the Arusha Accords would fail and “that if hostilities resumed, then upward of half a million people would die”. This information was withheld from the United Nations: “it was not until the genocide was over that information was passed to Maj.-Gen. Dallaire [who was in charge of UN forces in Rwanda].”

Washington’s objective was to displace France, discredit the French government (which had supported the Habyarimana regime) and install an Anglo-American protectorate in Rwanda under Major General Paul Kagame. Washington deliberately did nothing to prevent the ethnic massacres.

When a UN force was put forth, Major General Paul Kagame sought to delay its implementation stating that he would only accept a peacekeeping force once the RPA was in control of Kigali. Kagame “feared [that] the proposed United Nations force of more than 5,000 troops… [might] intervene to deprive them [the RPA] of victory”. Meanwhile the Security Council after deliberation and a report from Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali decided to postpone its intervention.

The 1994 Rwandan “genocide” served strictly strategic and geopolitical objectives. The ethnic massacres were a stumbling blow to France’s credibility which enabled the US to establish a neocolonial foothold in Central Africa. From a distinctly Franco-Belgian colonial setting, the Rwandan capital Kigali has become –under the expatriate Tutsi led RPF government– distinctly Anglo-American. English has become the dominant language in government and the private sector. Many private businesses owned by Hutus were taken over in 1994 by returning Tutsi expatriates. The latter had been exiled in Anglophone Africa, the US and Britain.

The Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA) functions in English and Kinyarwanda, the University previously linked to France and Belgium functions in English. While English had become an official language alongside French and Kinyarwanda, French political and cultural influence will eventually be erased. Washington has become the new colonial master of a francophone country.

Several other francophone countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have entered into military cooperation agreements with the US. These countries are slated by Washington to follow suit on the pattern set in Rwanda. Meanwhile in francophone West Africa, the US dollar is rapidly displacing the CFA Franc — which is linked in a currency board arrangement to the French Treasury.

Dr. Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal and Editor of the website. He is the author of The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003) and America’s “War on Terrorism”(2005). His most recent book is entitled Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War (2011). He is also a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. His writings have been published in more than twenty languages. He can be reached
Bank of America Shares Dip on Q1 Loss
Detroit demonstration organized by Moratorium NOW!
demanding the cancellation of municipal debts said to be
owed to Bank of America. The demonstration was
held on May 9, 2012.
Kevin McCoy, USA TODAY 8:09 a.m. EDT April 16, 2014

Bank of America swung to a $276 million first-quarter loss Wednesday as revenue declined while the bank continued to grapple with legal costs stemming from the financial crisis.

Shares of the nation's second-largest bank dropped sharply in pre-market trading immediately after the 7 a.m. EDT news, but were down less than 1% at $16.27 roughly an hour later.

The Charlotte, N.C.-based bank said revenue for the quarter slipped to $22.76 billion — edging the $22.33 billion forecast of Wall Street analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial Network.

The bank said it lost 5 cents a share. A year ago in the same period, it earned 10 cents a share or $1.5 billion.

Bank of America's adjusted earnings, not counting one-time charges, were 35 cents a share. That topped the 27-cent-per share projection of financial analysts surveyed by FactSet.

The financial results included a pre-tax expense of $6 billion, or approximately 40 cents a share after tax, to cover litigation costs as the bank moved to resolve mortgage-related litigation fallout from the financial crisis that began in 2007 and other issues.

"The cost of resolving more of our mortgage issues hurt our earnings this quarter," said CEO Brian Moynihan in a statement issued with the earnings results.

Bank of America in March agreed to pay $9.3 billion to settle claims it marketed risky mortgages to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. At the same time, the bank reached a $15 million settlement with the New York State Attorney General's office over its 2009 purchase of Merrill Lynch.

And on April 9, the bank also agreed to pay $772 million in refunds and fines to settle Consumer Financial Protection Bureau allegations that it had illegally bilked millions of customers with deceptive credit card practices. The agreement was "in line with what we expected," bank spokesman Tony Allen said last week.

Excluding litigation expenses, expenses in the bank's legacy mortgage-servicing division dropped by $1 billion compared with the first quarter of 2013.

CFO Bruce Thompson said liquidity and capital ratios "improved to record levels," while credit quality also improved.
Litigation Expenses Push Bank of America Into Loss
Detroit demonstration linking Bank of America
swaps with the financial ruin of the city on May
9, 2012.
7:49am EDT

(Reuters) - Bank of America Corp posted a first-quarter loss as the No. 2 U.S. bank recorded $6 billion in litigation expenses related to a settlement with the Federal Housing Finance Agency and other mortgage-related matters.

The bank reported a net loss attributable to shareholders of$514 million, or 5 cents per share, in the three months to March 31 compared with a profit of $1.11 billion, or 10 cents per share, a year earlier.

The previous quarter's results were hit by $1.6 billion in charges related to disputes with bond insurers.

Analysts on average had expected earnings of 5 cents per share, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.

BofA's shares, which have risen 5.3 percent so far this year, were down nearly 2 percent at $16.10 in premarket trading.

Revenue fell 3.8 percent to $22.66 billion, excluding accounting adjustments, but beat the average analyst estimate of $22.33 billion.

Bank of America is coming off its best year since before the financial crisis, with 2013 net income of $11.4 billion the highest since 2007. But large legal bills continue to overshadow the performance of many of its main businesses.

BofA agreed in March to pay $9.5 billion to settle claims that it sold Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac faulty mortgage bonds, helping it to end one of the largest legal headaches it still faced from the financial crisis.

BofA made progress resolving many of its legal issues in the first quarter, although some proved to be costly.

The bank said on March 26 that first-quarter pre-tax profit would be reduced by about $3.7 billion as a result of a settlement with the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the overseer of government-backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

"The cost of resolving more of our mortgage issues hurt our earnings this quarter," Chief Executive Brian Moynihan said in a statement.

Litigation expenses rose to $6.0 billion from $2.2 billion in the first quarter of 2013. Noninterest expenses increased to $22.24 billion from $19.50 billion.

Costs in the bank's Legacy Assets and Servicing division, excluding litigation expenses, fell to $1.6 billion from $2.6 billion a year earlier and $1.8 billion in the third quarter.

The Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank has said that costs in the unit, which handles delinquent mortgage loans, would fall below $1.1 billion a quarter by the end of 2014 and will be about $500 million a quarter by the end of 2015.

Bank of America released $379 million from its allowances for bad loans, compared with $804 million in the same period a year earlier and $1.2 billion in the fourth quarter.

(Reporting by Peter Rudegeair in New York and Tanya Agrawal in Bangalore; Editing by Ted Kerr)
Kim Il Sung: Great Exploits Go Down With Century
Kim Il Sung is the founder of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
April 15, 2014

April 15 marks the Day of the Sun, the birthday of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s (DPRK) founding leader President Kim Il Sung.

The Day of the Sun is one of the most important days in the DPRK’s calendar, so much so that the country has replaced the Gregorian calendar with one that begins with the Great Sun’s birth, on April 15, 1912.

President Kim Il Sung led his country from its founding in 1948, through the 1950-53 Korean War until he died in 1994, when his son Kim Jong Il took over.

President Kim Il Sung, upholding the banner of independence, rendered immortal service to contemporary  times and history.

Having embarked on the road of struggle for the country and people in his early teens, he authored the Juche idea, the gist of which is that the masses of the people are the masters and the driving force of the revolution and construction; in other words, it means that man is the master of his own destiny and has the strength with which to carve out his destiny.

Since then the Korean revolution has vigorously advanced along the road of independence.

In the period of the armed struggle to liberate Korea from the Japanese military occupation, he ensured that the guerrillas kept the strong conviction that they should fight the Japanese by making themselves weapons and grenades instead of looking forward to aids from others.

The guerrillas waged the arduous armed struggle for over 15 years, holding high the slogan of winning back the country by themselves, and achieved the country’s liberation.

After liberation he made sure that Korea took the road of Korean-style democracy, not adopting other countries’ styles, and vigorously led the struggle to reunify the country divided by foreign forces.

In the grim days of the Korean War (1950-1953) to repel the aggression of the United States he ensured that the service personnel of the Korean People’s Army employed unique tactical methods such as building tunnels and bringing direct-firing guns up to the heights, thus winning victory in the war.

After the war he put forward a unique line of economic construction to give priority to the development of heavy industry and simultaneously develop light industry and agriculture, and led his people to get rid of flunkeyism and dogmatism and take the road of independence.

When other socialist countries persistently forced Korea to join the CMEA, insisting on the “integrated economy” within them, he never vacillated in the slightest nor deviated an iota from the line of building the independent national economy.

In the mid-1980s the trend of “reform” and “openness” was sweeping the socialist countries, but he firmly maintained the independent stand and held up higher the red flag, thus defending the socialist system of Korea reliably even though others abandoned socialism.

Kim Il Sung paid great attention to realise the cause of making the world independent throughout his life.

He gave clear answers to the matters of principle arising in realizing the cause of global independence such as those on maintaining independence in the struggle for peace and fighting against the imperialist forces of aggression with the united efforts of all the peace-loving forces of the world, and on struggling while uniting and vice versa.

When Francois Mitterrand, head of the French Socialist Party, visited Korea in February 1981, Kim Il Sung said to him that in order to prevent a new world war, the European countries should not be aligned with any blocs but make themselves independent and neutral, and that they should help the newly-emerging countries to firmly maintain their independence and build theirs into independent, sovereign states.

When he met Utsunomiya Tokuma, Japanese politician, he told him that the global peace would be surely maintained only when all the countries of the world, including European and Asian countries as well as Japan became independent and that it was his ideal for peace.

Kim Il Sung assisted heart and soul other countries in accomplishing their cause of anti-imperialist independence.

Already in the period of anti-Japanese armed struggle for Korea’s liberation he actively assisted the Chinese revolution and defended the former Soviet Union with arms. After liberation he also gave unstinted assistance to the countries and nations in their struggle against imperialism.

The support and assistance given by him to the Algerian people who launched an armed struggle for the national liberation in Africa, known as the “Dark Continent” and the continent of colonies, wrote a brilliant page in world history of national liberation struggle.

When the Algerian patriots, encouraged by the victory of the Korean people in the Korean war, waged an armed struggle after forming the National Liberation Front in August 1954, he sent them food and other materials and set the day and the week of Algeria so as to express solidarity with them in their struggle.

When the Provisional Government of the Algerian Republic was established in September 1958, he saw that the DPRK was the first country to acknowledge it and establish diplomatic relations with it.

He also gave energetic support and aid to the peoples of Angola, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, and Namibia in their struggle against colonialism and racism, the Latin American peoples’ struggle against the US imperialists and pro-US dictatorship, Arabians’ struggle against the US imperialists and Israeli Zionists, as well as the Cuban, Vietnamese, Laotian and Cambodian peoples’ struggle against the aggression of the US imperialists, thus greatly inspiring them to bring about historic victories.

The banner of independence upheld by President Kim Il Sung is a great power of strength and encouragement to the Korean people who are achieving eye-opening successes in the socialist construction with a firm stand of independence and also to the progressive peoples of the world who are struggling for the realisation of global independence.

Meanwhile, the DPRK leader, Kim Jong Un paid respect to his grandfather today at the Day of the Sun celebration.

The country’s state-run television KRT carried footage of him visiting the Kumsusan Place of the Sun, with top military officials to mark the 102nd birth anniversary of his grandfather

In the video, Kim bowed deeply in front of statues of his Kim Il-Sung and his late father Kim Jong-Il.

The embalmed bodies of both late leaders lie in state in the massive mausoleum. 
Nigeria: Africa’s Biggest Economy?
Nigerian Finance Minister Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala.
April 16, 2014 Opinion & Analysis
Ejike Okupa

WORD is going round that Nigeria is poised to become Africa’s biggest economy. Nigeria does not have economic development; but mainly a transaction economy that is fuelled by consumption of imported goods and reliance on foreign goodwill to achieve its basic needs. If more than 75 percent of what Nigeria needs to survive as a nation are imported, can such a country be considered as growing and developing?

When there is hardly any city or state that can supply ‘24-/7’ water to its citizens, and public servants are owed outstanding wages, and pensioners have seen the real value of their pension gone, Nigeria is on a make-believe trajectory.

My in-laws live in Ibadan and they have said that the entire city goes without power for days. Just imagine that, and Ibadan, Oyo State, is a major population centre. No Nigerian bank stock is worth an equivalent of US$2/share. The total mortgage notes in Nigeria; a country of 160 million people is 20 000. There is outstanding housing need of 16 million, and no developer in Nigeria builds 1000 housing units a year. Do the maths.  Housing, as a significant component of any economy because of its socio-economic benefits, is annoyingly lacking given that since 1914, no government in Nigeria in collaboration with the private sector has built 100 000 housing units annually. Why so?

The government is playing with numbers and banking hope on mineral resources/reserves which are unearned income. Since the US importation of Nigeria’s oil has dropped from about 22 percent to its current import of 16 percent, Nigeria has had to scramble to find buyers. Spain is now the leading importer of Nigeria’s oil. Spain, a country that is struggling, is the importer of Nigeria’s main commodity that affords the government 85 percent of its overall expending. Do you understand the implication of such a relationship? Spain is hardly a member of G-8.

She is neither a developed nation nor a third world country — a floater. Since oil transaction is often carried out on IOU basis, what does Spain have to offer Nigeria? Longer payment terms and seeking support from EU to help facilitate balance of payment arrangements.  As a country with weak finances, Nigeria’s strength to borrow/trade (current account) is based on its foreign reserve. The Naira has been having problem sustaining its value. If Nigeria is that buoyant, how come 85 percent of its refined oil need is imported? Its currency, the Naira, since 1999, has lost about 210 percent value. Since Finance Minister Okonjo-Iweala’s debut, the Naira has lost almost 40 percent.

Hinging growth on rate of change of GDP as a volume, while the fundamentals are missing is voodoo economics and that has been prevalent since 1999, as the leaderships tries harder to convince Nigerians they are up to the task of delivering the most populous black nation in the world. Is the economy stupid? One may say YES in the case of Nigeria. Many college graduates in Nigeria, after more than a decade are not able to afford a 2-3 bedroom home, car and job that matches their education.

Here are three basic aspects of economic development: job creation, stabilised interest rate and stable currency. A major fluctuation in any of the three factors makes an economy stand on a faulty foundation — quicksand. That is why Nigeria’s Naira is weak currency — it has lost tremendous value and Nigeria’s banks cannot afford to make loans on amortising schedule. Instead, they do so on interest-only, with hefty up-front charges and payments. And the desire of Nigeria businesses to source credit facilities off-shore placed additional pressure on the foreign reserve such that Nigeria is not able to meet its 90-day current account requirement. The resultant effect, the Naira is on a wide and wild swing.  Until Nigeria admits its shortcomings in getting the fundamentals of the economy right, the fuzzy math, fluff in the projections, forecasts and predictions, will continue to undermine actual gains. The gains are imagined than actually measured. It is like what my mom taught me — “one who lies about catching fish pretending to throw fish into a bucket, will go home empty handed.”

While Nigeria’s leadership is pretending on how well it is doing, Nigerians are having a difficult time reconciling what gets said and what they see and feel. As they huddle in their federal cabinet weekly meetings, it is more “beer parlour” chant as Finance Minister Madam Okonjo-Iweala, the co-ordinating minister for economic development, dazzles them with voodoo stats as no one in the cabinet questions the authenticity of the numbers.

Since Madam Okonjo-Iweala’s debut, the Naira has lost value and she was recommended for HIRE as a World Bank expert. Well, we know the World Bank is not a bank for developed nations but for less fortunate nations that are seen as not worthy of access to global capital markets, such that they must live dealing with shylock lenders — vultures that descend on them. Under her Finance Ministry, Nigeria has seen more damages to her economy. It is amazing.

— African Executive

Why the Sudden Rush Into Africa? It’s the Oil
Morning Glory oil tanker seized by US imperialism and returned to occupied Libya.

2014-04-16 05:49:45

KENYA, Libya, Uganda and Nigeria are thousands of miles removed from that swirl of European tension known as Ukraine, but as drama unfolds in Eastern Europe, their destinies could be closely aligned.

In essence, the more Russian President Vladimir Putin puts the grip on Russian gas prices, the more Western powers, from Nato to the US, feel squeezed and desperate enough to look for oil elsewhere. Africa fits a nice profile for that. Suddenly, there’s a new sense of urgency on the continent, with the US stepping up its military and economic engagement post-haste since Putin made his Crimean power grab.

Before Putin could move to checkmate the West on the geopolitical chess map, President Barack Obama moved a few pieces to the Motherland. It’s an interesting gamble, considering Africa has less than 10 per cent of proven global oil reserves. Yet, in the search for alternative sources of energy, the potential returns of intervention in Africa are fairly fast and enormous.

Where the Middle East, cradle of oil booms, is volatile and where Shale Country USA is still in its infancy, Africa presents a quick-fix solution for petroleum hungry Western countries that don’t have time for renewable-energy cars to fully penetrate their markets.

Oil-spilling BP can tell you all about it, “project[ing] Africa will experience the world’s fastest regional energy demand growth [with] combined oil and gas production in Africa between today and 2035.”

If BP has its eyes on Africa, best believe everyone else does. Within a month of Crimea, additional US “special forces” troops ended up in Uganda to augment a hundred already there in a hunt for war-lusting Lord’s Resistance Army leader Joseph Kony. And to top that, the Pentagon sent in four freshly minted V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor hybrids to show we mean business.

“Please note that the deployment of these aircraft and personnel does not signify a change in the nature of the US military advisory role in this effort. African Union-led regional forces remain in the lead, with US forces supporting and advising their efforts,” Daniel Travis, a US Embassy spokesman in Uganda, deadpanned several days ago.

But the sudden speed between Putin’s power act and the move of well-armed US troops to Uganda and elsewhere in Africa is more than just a nice humanitarian play. Critical strategic interests in Africa are suddenly on a front burner in the race for energy.

Uganda, is part of an emerging and fast-growth East Africa Federation that includes Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi. As a recent Stratfor analysis noted “[n]ew oil and gas exploration projects, along with the potential establishment of a manufacturing base in East Africa, have created an interest in pipeline projects to carry natural gas and crude oil to export markets or refineries.”

Renewed strategic positioning in Africa is, of course, nothing new. The George W. Bush administration was dropping $5 billion a year into HIV/AIDS and malaria-prevention programmes, essentially softening the landscape for the eventual expansion of Africom, the US military command for Africa.

Hence, it was no surprise to find American planes blasting holes in Libya, drone bases in far-flung places like Niger, Djibouti, Burkina Faso and South Sudan, and US intelligence supporting French troops in Mali. Folks like Moammar Qadhafi needed to get out of the way, and now it’s US naval ships stopping renegade Libyan oil tankers from sending black market fuel to North Korea.

The headline fight against rising Islamic terrorist tides in Africa is a good pitch story. But the lesser known — yet more important — story is the continental energy rush gradually unfolding in Africa. Western powers, already irritated by China’s aggressive entry into African markets — highlighted by billions of dollars in investment and a $200 million “gift” to build a shiny new African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia — are stepping up their game before the rising Asian power dominates the whole thing.

That’s happened quite fast between slow increases in US troops on African soil to the presence of more than 2,000 French troops patrolling the war-torn Central African Republic. And just a few weeks ago, the EU nervously announced the commitment of an additional 1,000 troops, which struck many as odd, given Europe’s current preoccupation with Russian troops on its doorstep. Folks seem awfully pressed to stabilise that region, which neighbours Uganda and isn’t all that far away from Nigeria — another African country that accounts for five per cent of US oil imports.

In essence, Africa is becoming refrontiered, the next — but already charted — neocolonial play with subtle shades of humanitarianism and economic growth to make it look good. Make no mistake about it: there are real geopolitical intentions at work. Hunting down warlords and preventing Rwanda genocide redux is, of course, needed foreign policy common sense.

But these are belt-tightening times for governments and their militaries (including ours). No one’s investing in Africa just to get good PR and a UN shout-out.

—By arrangement with The Root-The Washington Post
Will Russia Intervene If Kiev Starts Civil War?
Russian tanks mobilizing during a military exercise in March 2014.
14.04.2014 18:14

All required rituals have been observed. The next step that the junta was going to make is to shoot themselves in the back of the head (twice, as it should be in the Ukraine). Yanukovych appeared in a company of two "associates," the Interior Ministry released a completely unambiguous statement, Churkin spoke at the UN Security Council. As a result, the term of the ultimatum expired, but the junta did not take immediate risks to use force. Actually, this was the purpose of the action.

The deployment of troops is the last thing that Russia needs now, but Russia has drawn the red line. One should not shower peaceful towns with missiles simply because the Kiev rulers are not willing to talk to the south-east.

For the time being, the situation in Donetsk continues to evolve according to the plan of the uprising: key cities have been taken under control. Each of the taken cities are of strategic importance: Slavyansk is the largest railway hub in the region, Krasny Liman - the largest sorting station, Kramatorsk - a major engineering center, Mariupol is the key to the Sea of ​​Azov. Altogether, they create a defense zone around Donetsk and Lugansk, intercepting the road leading to the cities.

Police officers in the restive cities take the side of the uprising, local authorities recognize the Donetsk republic. Now it will be possible to hand over the situation back into their hands, although they will be receiving instructions and orders from Donetsk. Self-defense forces that were taking cities the day before yesterday would be relocated to the border area to take control of the entrances. More new units are being formed to take custody of warehouses, military units, airfields.

It seems that the scenario with the People's Liberation Army, which was considered a month ago, is being realized fully. Well-concerted actions of the groups that were taking the cities clearly belong to professionals, but it seems that these people are not foreign agents, as the Ukrainian authorities hastily sentenced too many of them to death. Are there any Russian planners among them? Maybe, there are. In the end, the Americans pour their money in, so we can help with knowledge.

The operation in the Donetsk region becomes a response to "color revolutions." This is a very interesting response from a technological and methodological aspect: how to take power in a given region under the condition of a collapsing state. The declassified film about the actions of "little green men" in the Crimea, plus self-defense actions in Donetsk have demonstrated it to those who can see how Russia could respond to "color revolutions." Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan are next - we are only showing that everything is not going to be so simple and easy.

As for the situation in Ukraine, one can say that there are two ways for the situation to develop. The first one is peaceful, relatively peaceful. If the junta does not dare to start a war, then Donetsk, with difficulty, will hold a referendum on independence and desire to live in the united but federal Ukraine. Apparently, the referendum will be held in Lugansk as well. Afterwards, this experience will start to repeat itself in other areas of the south-east, while Donetsk and Lugansk will be able to rely on Russia's help as legally independent territories.

Federalization, in Donetsk style, will be conducted throughout the south-east of Ukraine. For Dnepropetrovsk and Zaporozhye, something specific will be invented, as Kolomoysky's billions will have to be neutralized differently. Finally, all independent regions of Ukraine will be able to hold a unification congress at which they will announce the creation of the new Federal Ukraine, to which all other areas of the country will be offered to join. Those, who do not join the new state, will have the flag, anthem and coat of arms, as well as the debts of the old Ukraine.

The second option: Kiev will start a war. In this case, Russia will be forced to take the south-east under her protection, but only this one territory, and do the same. Russia should not worry whether the international community recognizes the new subject of international relations or not. The lives of millions of compatriots are much more important than a tender glance from non-traditional partners. However, in this case, the collapse of Ukraine will take place at a much more accelerated pace. The territories that will remain on the right side, will simply fail to cope with a bulk of catastrophic problems that will come falling down on their shoulders.

El Murid
CIA Director Brennan Blamed for Civil War in Ukraine
Eastern Ukraine rebellion against fascism spreads.
14.04.2014 12:40
By Xavier Lerma

The world knows the American CIA has been involved in coups around the world for decades. So it comes as no surprise when Viktor Yanukovych blamed them for starting the civil war in the Ukraine. He pointed the finger at CIA Director Brennan and warned the puppet president Turchinov and his cronies that they will be charged as criminals. He asked the military and police of the Ukraine not to shoot Ukrainians because the people will never forgive them. The Ukrainian protest is loud and clear to the US, "Take Your Hands Off Ukraine!", but will an Aleksandr Nevsky come to their rescue or will the Cossacks of the Ukraine fight off US aggression?

The militia revolts in Ukrainian cities forced the US puppet president in Kiev, Aleksandr Turchinov, to say in a televised address that a decision was taken to launch "a large scale" operation, "with the involvement of the military". Helicopters were sent in. Slavyansk is under siege but the people are fighting back since they do not recognize the government in Kiev. Mass media does not drown them to believe illusions as the children of the west so they still know the truth.

Just last Saturday when a militia entered, Slavyansk Mayor Nelly Shtepa said, "They are from the People's Militia Donetsk . They seized the Municipal Building, they said today they are against the power in Kiev. They hoisted a Russian flag on top of the police HQ". Shtepa added that the people of the city support the activists' calls for a referendum on the region's federalization, and are urging the police to side with the people. If the authorities in Kiev will "try to suppress the uprising, many civilians will die, this cannot be allowed".

Special Forces soldiers refused to obey orders from Kiev. "Today, we have refused to carry out orders. We do not want to go against our own people since people are fighting for the best in the country", - said the commandos. The first thing they decided to do was wear the orange and black ribbon of St. George. The police and army siding with locals was a triumph for peace the West could not endure.

Shootings in Slavyansk April 13 sparked the ousted Ukrainian president's speech: "The responsibility for dragging the country into civil war lays on the US, which brutally interfered in the situation and pointed out what to do. According to my information ..., Kiev was visited by CIA Director Brennan. He met with security forces illegally appointed in Ukraine, including Avakov, Nalivaychenko, and Yarema, as well as so-called acting president Turchinov. It was after these meetings, it was decided to force operations in eastern Ukraine ."

"I would like to evaluate the activities of the so-called authorities of Ukraine, which sooner or later will have to answer before the law for their decisions. I have to say: you will be held criminally responsible. First of all Avakov, Nalivaychenko and those SBU and MIA , who perform these criminal orders. As commander in chief, I appeal to the military, the Security Service and Interior Ministry not to follow unlawful orders ! Do not shoot the Ukrainian people! The people will never forgive you for that!"

"Now there is an urgent question of the referendum, which can protect the country from splitting in half. This is the only solution," he said. He says people should be allowed to vote in a referendum, then a new constitution and then parliamentary elections. However, Kiev USA knows if there is a referendum, the majority especially in the East and South will prefer to be with Russia in some way.

First Yanukovych signed a deal with Russia then came the imps like Senator McCain who visited Ukraine as he did in Syria. Then like a witch in Hansel and Gretel or in Snow White, Nuland passed around goodies for the Ukrainian people promising joy and democracy for one and all. She meant the devils democracy. "We're here to help", she said. Kerry and Obama also want to help just like they did in Syria, Egypt and Afghanistan and other countries.

She's crazy yelled Crimea and they called big brother Russia to save them and now they are Russian. In Donetsk, Lugansk and Kharkov they have already declared independence. The people are waving Russian flags and want to be a part of Russia. They want a referendum so let them vote instead of interfering with the vote and telling them who can be president and who cannot. Even Darth Vader was denied candidacy as was Yanukovych. Watch out! Vader is going to sue. The elected Ukrainian president was ousted for sealing a deal with Russia that was more economically beneficial to them.

Russia is number one in oil and gas exports and that can't be say the Arabs. They don't want Exxon begging Putin. Russia is just scratching the surface of their black gold and the Arab influence will not be as powerful. They will not be poor but greed begets more greed. The West has a good deal with the Arabs. They ignore the lack of democracy and human right in the Arab world while fighting for needed territory in the name of democracy. If Ukraine falls then Russian influence becomes greater in the west which means bye bye greedy bankers and oligarchs. Hello economic prosperity and peace.

I just heard people choking from the last paragraph. Those coughing are the NWO kings Rothchilds, Rockefellers, Soros' and those from the Democratic Alliance who do not want you to know this reality. Also choking or laughing are the indoctrinated sometimes called useful idiots. Step over them like a meadow muffin. The time has come in this age where information can be known without someone reading a teleprompter to you.

Overthrowing governments and increasing their war machine has been the US modus operandi. How can anyone believe anything they say? If Obama had taken all the money used on wars and insurrections his Obamacare would have worked. However, he was not running to be president of the US. He does what "they" tell him to do and he gets vacations separate from his wife. What a deal!

In the mean time where is Putin? As a young Ukrainian recently said, "Come on Putin! What are you waiting for?!"  The US media already said Putin invaded the Ukraine last month so might as well come in to protect those cities under siege in East Ukraine. In this way the MSM in the West can take a break and show re-runs. If Putin was half the dictator the West says he is, none of this would be happening. All the cities in the East and South Ukraine would be protected by Russian soldiers. Instead we have men and women building barricades and old veterans from the Afghanistan war defending their home. Young men are chasing down deaf and mute policeman who turn out to be American mercenaries. People are praying in the streets hoping for peace.

It is better to have a guard dog or guard bear in this case. So, "Come on Putin! What are you waiting for?!"  The fact is President Putin is a conservative economist and not a dictator and will only allow intervention if the Ukraine suffers worse. At this point in time Putin=KGB should have crossed your brilliant mind if you were raised in the West. Just remember it came from Putin's admirer in this video and we all know his record as a peacemaker. If the US really wants the Ukraine they should install there free American TV and internet. Also, little Vickie Nuland should pass out free drugs instead of food. Soon thereafter the masses will be less objectionable and less prone to feelings of independence just like those in their own decadent country. Gotta go! CIA calling.

Xavier Lerma

Contact Xavier Lerma at

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Putin: Russia Expects UN to Denounce Kiev Authorities’ Anti-Constitutional Actions
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Russia  April 15, 22:37 UTC+4

Russian President has expressed concern over the military operation in Ukraine’s southeastern areas

MOSCOW, April 15. /ITAR-TASS/. Russian President Vladimir Putin has expressed concern over the military operation staged by the Kiev authorities in Ukraine’s southeastern areas on Tuesday, the Kremlin press service said on Tuesday, citing Putin’s telephone conversation with United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

“The crisis development of the situation in Ukraine, which sharply aggravated in connection with Kiev authorities-initiated military operation in the country’s southeast has been discussed,” the Kremlin press service said in a statement.

Putin in particular emphasized that the Russian side expects the United Nations and the international community to clearly condemn the Kiev authorities’ anti-constitutional actions. During the phone conversation, Ban noted the necessity for all sides to make efforts to de-escalate the situation in Ukraine. The UN press office quoted Ban as saying he is concerned about the instable situation in the east of Ukraine. The UN chief urged all sides to try to de-escalate tensions.

Protests against the new self-proclaimed Ukrainian authorities, who came to power as a result of a coup in February, have erupted in Ukraine’s Russian-speaking eastern territories, in particular, the Donetsk, Lugansk and Kharkov regions, with demonstrators demanding referendums on the country’s federalization. Ukrainian parliament-appointed acting head of state Alexander Turchinov on Tuesday announced the start of an antiterrorism operation in the Donetsk Region in an apparent effort to put an end to protests of federalization supporters.
Peacekeepers In Ukraine To Only Mothball Crisis — Russian PM
Russian Federation Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev.
Russia  April 15, 19:23 UTC+4

Dmitry Medvedev said “the only way to preserve Ukraine and calm the situation is to create normal conditions for the country’s development”

MOSCOW, April 15. /ITAR-TASS/. Peacekeepers will not solve any problem in Ukraine but will only mothball the crisis, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday.

“The peacekeeping contingent will not solve anything,” he said. “Unfortunately, it will only mothball the problem.”

Medvedev said “the only way to preserve Ukraine and calm the situation is to create normal conditions for the country’s development”.

He said the de facto authorities should hold dialogue with people and take into account the interests of all ethnic groups, as well as admit that Russians are also citizens of Ukraine and can use their language “which in essence is a second state lanuaguage (in the country)."

Medvedev has also urged those who are calling to help Ukraine to take some actual steps to do so.

“We have been constantly accused of taking decisions that hamper Ukraine’s development, of having Ukraine by the throat for its decisions concerning gas,” Medvedev said on Tuesday. “We have a different position: we proceed from the fact that we have been helping Ukraine and are helping it now. Nonetheless, those who are calling for help to Ukraine should finally do something for it. First of all, I mean European partners and overseas partners. Just give at least one dollar. So far, we hear only endless promises: we will give one billion, we will transfer five billions - I wish they would give anything at all. We gave Ukraine three billion and preserved the discount for quite a long time."
Moscow Says EU’s Hints on Russian Role in Ukraine’s Armed Standoff ‘Inadmissible’
Pro-Russian demonstrations in eastern Ukraine.
Russia  April 15, 17:31 UTC+4

The EU must distance itself from biased approaches based on the undeniable support of a certain conflicting party in Ukraine, the Russian Foreign Ministry says

Russian Defense Ministry suspends handover of armaments and military hardware to Ukraine

MOSCOW, April 15. /ITAR-TASS/. European Union’s suggestions about Russia’s alleged involvement in armed standoff in the east of Ukraine are inadmissible, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Tuesday.

“It is high time for the European Union to realize that if it really tries to play a serious and positive role in the settlement of the Ukrainian interior crisis, than it must distance itself from biased approaches, based on the undeniable support of a certain conflicting party in Ukraine,” the statement said.

“Suggestions about Russia’s alleged involvement in the armed standoff in the eastern part of
Ukraine, as well as attempts to openly interfere in Russia’s domestic affairs, including demands addressed to the Russian Federation Council (the parliament’s upper chamber) to ‘immediately revise these or those decisions’ are totally inadmissible,” the statement from the ministry added.

Earlier today, Russian President Vladimir Putin's press secretary Dmitry Peskov has dismissed claims about Russian military presence in eastern Ukraine as absurd.

Sanctions against Russia counterproductive

Russia’s Foreign Ministry has stated that any sanctions against Russia are unjustified and counterproductive. The ministry’s information and press department made this statement in connection with new decisions of the EU Council on the situation in Ukraine.

“We have to declare again that any sanctions against Russia are unjustified and counterproductive,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said. “Instead of trying to scare us with another set of sanctions, the European Union should concentrate on the joint search for a solution to the internal Ukrainian crisis," the ministry added.
Putin: Ukraine’s Radical Escalation Puts It On Edge of Civil War
President Vladimir Putin during Russian military exercises in March 2014.
April 15, 2014 20:23

The sharp escalation of the Ukraine crisis virtually puts the country on the brink of civil war, Russian President Vladimir Putin told German Chancellor Angela Merkel during a telephone call.

Putin and Merkel discussed the upcoming Ukrainian crisis talks between Russia, Ukraine, the EU and the US, scheduled to be held on Thursday in Geneva.

Merkel’s press office noted that, despite some differences of opinion, the upcoming talks were the main focus of the telephone conversation.

"While there were differences in the interpretation of current events, preparations for the planned meeting in Geneva...were the focus of the talks," Merkel's office said in a statement.

Putin meanwhile expressed hope that the Geneva talks will help to de-escalate the situation, and return it to peaceful cooperation.

The president also reiterated the importance of stabilizing the Ukrainian economy, and ensuring the supply and transportation of Russian natural gas to Europe.

On Tuesday, Moscow urged international partners to condemn Kiev’s recent "anti-constitutional" actions in southeastern Ukraine, which it believes may lead to catastrophe.

“We are deeply concerned over the military operation launched by the Ukrainian special forces with support by the army. There have already been victims,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Russian diplomats called it a criminal offense for Ukraine to fight against its own people who demand that their lawful rights are preserved. “Current events demonstrate persistent unwillingness of Kiev’s authorities to organize a dialogue with Ukrainian regions, which is necessary for the country,” the statement reads.

Giving his reaction, Polish Foreign Minister, Radoslav Sikorskii, has said that Warsaw agrees fully with the military operation in eastern Ukraine, RIA Novosti reports. He believes the Kramatorsk actions against “armed people” who “occupy airports” to be in line with the law.

Earlier in the day, Putin also spoke to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. During the call Putin stressed that the escalation of the Ukraine crisis was the result of Kiev’s irresponsible politics, which ignored legitimate rights and the interests of the Russian-speaking population.

The two also discussed bilateral cooperation and other topics on the international agenda, including the negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program.
Military Seize Airfield Controlled By Anti-Government Activists In Eastern Ukraine
Ukrainian map showing areas where the US-backed military is in operation.
April 15, 2014 13:27

Ukrainian troops have seized an airfield in the city of Kramatorsk as part of a security operation against anti-government activists in the eastern part of the country. Activists claimed several people were wounded.


Coup-imposed President Aleksandr Turchinov said that he received a telephone call confirming that the military has seized the airfield in Kramatorsk.

Ukrainian troops approached the military airfield in armored personnel carriers between the eastern cities of Kramatorsk and Slavyansk earlier on Tuesday, the people’s militia located at the airfield told RIA Novosti over the phone.

“They started negotiating with the people’s militia, which is in control of the airfield. The shooting started unexpectedly. There are injured among the people’s militia, and there may be deaths,” they said.

The activists who controlled the base said they were forced to retreat. However, the city is still under the control of the people’s militia, as they have blocked the entrance to Kramatorsk and are ready to defend the city, the activists added.

“We were forced out of the airfield, but the city itself is under our control, we won’t allow [the Ukrainian troops] to enter,” one of the activists told Interfax.

“There are about 60 units of armored vehicles. They have been preparing for several days, and now they started to storm [the airfield]. The protesters blocked their way, they started shooting, there are wounded. Our people retreated. There are about 15 tanks, the other units are armored personnel vehicles,” another member of the people’s militia told RIA Novosti.

However, the aid to the head of Ukraine’s Ministry of Interior Stanislav Rechinsky said there were no casualties. He did not specify the number of captives, saying that “this information will come in the upcoming days”

He added that special forces of the Interior Ministry Omega and of SBU Alfa took part in the operation.

Planes and helicopters were mobilized during the raid to “defend the machinery, as it was not known how the [security operation] would end,” according to the Ukrainian army.

A RIA Novosti reporter on the scene said after the security operation that at around 5 p.m. on Tuesday, hundreds of civilians gathered at the airfield to negotiate with the troops. There were about 50 military officers in black and green uniforms, the reporter added.

The Ukrainian troops fired warning shots into the air to disperse the civilians. In turn, the protesters started setting up barricades.

A Ukrainian security authority who was appointed chief of the security operation in eastern Ukraine said on Tuesday that all activists who do not lay down their arms will be "destroyed."

"They must be warned that if they do not lay down their arms, they will be destroyed," Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) General Vasily Krutov told reporters, as quoted by AFP.

Russian President Vladimir Putin urged the UN and the international community to condemn Kiev’s “unconstitutional” actions in eastern Ukraine, the Kremlin’s press service said in a Tuesday statement.

Putin spoke on the phone with UN Chief Ban Ki-Moon and discussed the escalating tensions which have been caused by Kiev’s security operation.

"The Secretary-General...underlined that any deepening of the crisis would be profoundly detrimental for all concerned; hence the need for everyone to work to de-escalate the situation," Ban's press office said in a statement.


Earlier on Tuesday, reports emerged that the eastern city of Slavyansk was being raided by Ukrainian troops as part of the security operation.

“Currently there is a major attack on Slavyansk, armored personnel vehicles are entering the city...there are many troops. The men are getting ready to defend [the city],” head of the Donbass people’s militia, Sergey Tsyplakov, told RIA Novosti.

“There is a lot of military machinery here,” said one of the activists. “But the shooting hasn’t started yet.”

RT Spanish correspondent Francisco Guaita, reporting from the scene later in the day, said that Slavyansk is calm. According to Guaita, the regional administration building and local police station are still under the control of anti-government activists and there are no Ukrainian military troops inside the city.

Ukrainian officials denied media reports of troops circling the city.

“There is no military machinery in Slavyansk, no troops, though there are a lot of panicky reports in the media of tanks moving [to the city], armored vehicles and so on,” said the aid to the head of Ukraine’s Ministry of Interior Rechinsky.

RT’s Guaita also reported that hundreds of people were gathering in the center of Slavyansk “to make it clear that they want a referendum, they are not going to move from here...and they want more sovereignty.”

Anti-government protesters have been holding rallies in the southeastern part of the country following the coup in Kiev on February 22. Activists have seized government buildings in most of the cities in the Donetsk region.

On Sunday, the Kiev government launched a crackdown operation in Slavyansk. Following the event, Ukraine’s Security Council approved a full-scale security operation in the country’s eastern regions. Moscow slammed Kiev’s order, saying it was “criminal.”

On Monday, Turchinov signed a decree to officially begin a “special anti-terrorist operation.”
Those Who Don’t Lay Arms, Will Be Destroyed - Ukrainian Military Operation's Commander
Ukraine troops threaten civil war.
April 15, 2014 15:49

A Ukrainian general leading the operation against protesters in the east of the country has warned that activists who refuse to lay down their arms will be “destroyed.”

“They must be warned that if they do not lay down their arms, they will be destroyed,” General Vasily Krutov, first deputy head of the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) told reporters, as cited by AFP.

Krutov, recently appointed chief of the SBU’s Anti-Terrorist Center, added that activists were being supported by hundreds of soldiers from the Russian army's Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU).

The Kremlin said the allegations about Russia’s military presence in eastern Ukraine are “absurd.”

"These are absurd statements. There are no Russian troops there. The president and the foreign minister have spoken about it,” said Vladimir Putin’s press secretary, Dmitry Peskov on Tuesday.

"We can only be startled by the fact that all these statements made by the Russian side are deliberately chosen not to be heard (by the West)," he added.

Kiev authorities launched a military operation against anti-government protesters in the East of the former Soviet republic.

According to activists, four people were killed and two others injured on Tuesday as troops seized an airfield in the city of Kramatorsk, which had earlier been controlled by protesters.

A source at Ukraine’s Defense Ministry told Interfax that there were no victims among the military as a result of the operation.

Acting President Aleksandr Turchinov confirmed that Ukrainian special forces regained control over the facility.

On Tuesday evening, Krutov, who personally supervised the operation in Kramatorsk, appeared before local residents gathered on the airfield. According to RIA Novosti, the SBU official attempted to explain to them that the military had arrived at the site to protect them from “terrorists.” However, the crowd responded shouting they were “peaceful citizens.” The activists then pushed Krutov several times, but were stopped by special forces troops who fired warning shots into the air.

Conflicting reports say that Ukrainian military – supported by armored vehicles and helicopters – have also entered the city of Slavyansk.

Earlier on Tuesday, Roman Sokolenko, from the People's Militia of Donbass, told RT that transport was not being allowed out of the eastern city while “tanks were approaching.” He said protesters were manning barricades in preparation for the possible storm. Activists were in good spirits and “ready to protect their land.”