Sunday, November 19, 2023

086 - 6 October 2022 - Remarks by President Biden at Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Reception


Cuban Missile Crisis 2.0

6 October 2022 - Remarks by President Biden at Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Reception


7:32 P.M. EDT
...

There’s a lot at stake in American foreign policy as well, where I spend most of my time and my — my career, I should say.

And we have some real difficult decisions to make, relative to what’s going on in Ukraine, and we’re going to continue to support them. But first time since the Cuban Missile Crisis, we have a direct threat of the use of the nuclear weapon if, in fact, things continue down the path they’ve been going. That’s — that’s a different deal. That’s a different deal.

And, you know, we’re trying to figure out: What — what is Putin’s off-ramp? Where — where does he get off? Where does he find a way out? Where does he find himself in a position that he does not not only lose face, but lose significant power within Russia?

So I guess what I’m saying is that we have to keep the Senate because two years of — of chaos is going to create a lot of changes around the world as well. I’ve spent the bulk of my time — not a joke; and I don’t think any of you would think it’s an exaggeration — I’ve spent a couple hundred hours so far just trying to hold NATO together so we’re all in the same spot.

Everybody is united in Europe, relative to what we do in Ukraine and relative to Russia. We find ourselves in positions that we’ve been able to get significant support from the Quad — from Australia, India, and Japan — relative to China and the South China Sea.

There’s a lot of changes going on a whole lot that I’d like to talk about with you if you want to talk about them in the question-and-answer period.

But the bottom line is this: If you take a look at what’s happened, we have over — I know no one thought we could get any of this done. But from the very beginning, I introduced legislation relating to the — the infrastructure of this country. We used to be, in the United States — have the best infrastructure in the world. Now we rank in the low 20s in terms of the quality of our infrastructure.

We’re in a situation where — you know, you all are successful, most of you, business people. If you’re going to invest where you can get your product to market, where you have ports that you can function out of, where you have highways and bridges that function.

And so, you know, we used to be — for example, in terms of investment of research and development, we used to be number two in the world. Now we’re number nine. China used to be number eight. Now they’re number two.

We’re finally investing in research and development, which is generating an awful lot of ingenuity. Things are happening in a big way. For example, I was just upstate. We — you all know what’s going on in terms of semiconductors. And, you know, we’re in a position now where there’s investments that are occurring that are going to exceed probably $3- to $400 billion over the next five years, employing an awful lot of people, putting us in position, once again, to lead the world.

We invented the computer chip. We invented it here in the United States. We used to have — just 30 years ago, we had 40 percent of the market. Now we have virtually no percent of the market, and we’re in a situation where we, in fact, don’t have the ability, up to now, to deal with so- — very sophisticated computer chips.

We did all that technology. Well, it’s about time we take it back, and we’re doing that now. As I said, we’re talking about investments that are consequential but generating an awful lot of investment off the sidelines from all of you people around the wo- — the United States.

And the thing is we- — in Upstate New York, in Poughkeepsie and — and up in Syracuse. And you’re — you know, there going to be billions of dollars invested.

And here’s the deal:
It’s all made in America. It’s made in America. It’s about time we control the — the idea of access, instead of we have pandemic and you find out you can’t — there — they stopped production in Lat- — excuse me, in the Far East or in the Pacific. And guess what? We don’t have —

One of the reasons why inflation was so high last year was the lack of semiconductors to build automobiles. That was one of — 30 percent of all the inflation that occurred.

And so, there’s a whole lot that we have an opportunity to deal with. And I know — I’m got to short-circuit this in the interest of time for all of you. But the deal is that I’m more optimistic about America’s prospects. We’re better positioned than any na- — any major nation in the world to own the second quarter of the 21st century. And we re- — we really are.

Since I’ve become President, with the help a lot of you, we’ve created 10 million new jobs — 10 million new jobs. We’ve created 685,000 manufacturing jobs.

Where is it written to say we can’t be the manufacturing capital of the world again?
Where does it say that? I don’t know — I didn’t read that anywhere.

And I’m also encouraged because we talked about — see this handsome young man here, who’s going to be going to college next year? I’m encouraged because of his generation and those people between 30 years of age and his year. And I’m — I’m not joking. Because they’re the best-educated, the best-informed, the least prejudiced, and the most engaged administration [generation] in American history — I mean, generation.

So, we got a lot to look forward to — a whole hell of a lot to look forward to, but we got to focus on it. We’ve got to focus. We can’t walk away from the opportunity that exists.

And I will say very respectfully, we’re the only nation in the world, in my view, that has come out of cri- — every crisis we’ve faced, we’ve come out of it stronger than we went in — stronger than we went in. I know I get kidded about saying “build back better,” but I mean what I’m saying, that we have to build back better. We’re at a real inflection point in American history, in world history.

I mean, you know, so much has changed and not just because of any particular leader. It happens every four to six generations.

If you’re Putin, you got eight time zones and the tundra is melting and methane is leaking and it’s four times as consequential. It’s not going to — the permafrost is not going to again freeze.

I mean, you know, you look around the world at all the things that are changing. And so, we have an opportunity not only to help ourselves but once again lead the world in a way that makes sense for the rest of the world.


You have most of Africa, over a billion people — you have people all over the world that need help and can generate economic growth. And we can be an engine to allow all that — all of that.

So I guess — I said I was not going to talk very long; I’ve already talked too long. But — but there’s a lot going on in terms — both domestically and in terms of foreign policy. And it’s a very

Let me put it this way. Think about it: We have not faced the prospect of Armageddon since Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis. We’ve got a guy I know fairly well; his name is Vladimir Putin. I spent a fair amount of time with him. He is not joking when he talks about the potential use of tactical and nuclear weapons, or biological or chemical weapons, because his military is, you might say, significantly underperforming.

It’s part of Russian doctrine that they will not — they will not — if the motherland is threatened, they’ll use whatever force they need, including nuclear weapons.


I don’t think there’s any such thing as an ability to easily lose a tactical nuclear weapon and not end up with Armageddon.

So there’s a lot at stake — a lot at stake.
And we — I guess I’ll conclude by saying this. I knew — I spent most of my career dealing with criminal justice issues in the Supreme Court and foreign policy

I was chairman of those committees as a senator for 360 years. (Laughter.) 36 years. I was Vice President for eight years, where the President asked me to be Vice President because he wanted me to deal with a lot of foreign policy pieces.

And now — and I — I didn’t realize how much — and you all travel the world and know the world. I didn’t realize how much serious damage the last administration did to our relationships around the world. The America First policies put us basically last.

I’ll end with a quote. I showed up at the first G7 meeting in England, in February after I was elected. And I’m sitting there with the NATO heads of state, sitting between Macron and the new Chancellor of Germany, Scholz. And I said, “America is back.” You know what the response was? For how long?” Not a joke. “For how long?”

And then one said — and I will not say who it was — but one of those heads of state looked at me and said, “What would you say, Mr. President, if you went back to your hotel room and on the television here in Britain, there was showing — there was a showing that you had a group of armed people going down the halls of Parliament breaking down the doors to stop the succession of the parliamentary process and who would be the prime minister? What would you say about Great Britain? What would you say if the same thing happened in the Bundestag?”

Folks, don’t underestimate what the rest of the world is looking at and wondering about: Are we still the United States of America? Are we still that democracy that they look to?

And one of the things I realize — and I’ve been — as I said, I’ve known every major head of state in the last 30 years and dealt with them face to face. What I didn’t realize — and I knew America was critical, but I didn’t realize when you walk into a foreign leaders’ conference, and you’re the President of the United States — it’s not me; you’re President of the United States — they all look to you. Look to you. “How stable is your country? What are you going to do? What’s going to happen?” And there’s a great deal of doubt around the world right now, and there need not be.

We can turn this into an enormous asset, enormous prospects for the United States if we do the right thing. But we can’t do it if we lose control of the House and the Senate.

And so what you’re doing here, particularly we’re talking about the Senate, is a big, big deal.

So I’m going to hand the microphone to — back over to the senator. And then I’ll — and then I’ll do whatever I’m told. (Laughter and applause.)

7:50 P.M. EDT


---
[MRT: Here it is 4 years]

11 September 2023 - Remarks by President Biden at Roundtable Meeting with CEOs

And I think we’re at those inflection points in history. I really do. I think what we do in the next three, four years is going to determine what the world looks like in the next three or four decades.


RELATED POSTS:




***

***
Uncovering the truth took over two years of self-funded, tireless investigation.
I decided to open it for free, no paywall, despite huge investment.
Because the truth matters.
Please consider supporting my work with a donation.

Every bit helps keep this mission alive!

(retweet and follow)

085 - 14 Sept 2022: Statement by Group of Creditors of Ukraine

RESEARCHING TOPIC: Ukrainian government would not approve any action against its creditors.

It is very unlikely that Ukraine would strike a Key European infrastructure while asking for debt payment postponement it worked for several months to agree on.

Without debt postponement and new loans Ukraine would go into messy default. 


20 July 2022 - Ukraine seeks debt freeze as war ravages economy

Ukraine has asked its international creditors, including Western powers and the world's largest investment firms, to freeze its debt payments for two years so it can focus its dwindling financial resources on repelling Russia.

Facing an estimated 35% to 45% crash in GDP this year following Moscow's invasion in February, Ukraine's finance ministry said on Wednesday it was hoping to finalise the deferral on its roughly $20 billion of debt by Aug. 9.

12 August 2022 - Ukraine's creditors agree 2-year freeze on $20 billion overseas debt

Ukraine's overseas creditors backed its request for a two-year freeze on payments on almost $20 billion in international bonds, a regulatory filing showed on Wednesday, a move that will allow the war-ravaged country to avoid a messy debt default.

14 September 2022 - Ukraine's western government creditors agree debt service freeze

Ukraine's western government creditors concluded on Wednesday a memorandum of understanding on a planned debt service suspension, the group said.

The group, which includes Canada, France, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom and the United States, said in July that they would provide a coordinated suspension of Kyiv's debt servicing to the end of 2023 and potentially for an additional year.

"This MoU eases Ukraine's liquidity pressures and allows its government to increase social, health and economic spending in response to Russia's unjustified, unprovoked and illegal war of aggression," the group said in a statement issued by France's finance ministry.

14 September 2022 - Statement by Group of Creditors of Ukraine (USA)

The representatives of the Group of creditors of Ukraine (“The Group”) and the government of Ukraine met virtually on September 14, 2022 to conclude a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in order to implement the debt service suspension announced on July 20, 2022.

This MoU eases Ukraine’s liquidity pressures and allows its government to increase social, health and economic spending in response to Russia’s unjustified, unprovoked and illegal war of aggression.

During the meeting, the Minister of Finance of Ukraine provided a description of the economic and financial situation in his country and presented the measures taken by his government in the past few months to support the Ukrainian economy in the context of the war.

The Group welcomed the reforms implemented by the government of Ukraine to address the economic and financial consequences of the war. In addition, the Group welcomed the conclusion of an agreement with bondholders and warrantholders to defer debt payments for two years, which represents substantive support for the government and people of Ukraine.

Finally, the Group strongly encourages all other official bilateral creditors to swiftly reach agreement with Ukraine on a debt service suspension.

We will continue to closely coordinate and assess the situation with the support of the IMF and the World Bank.

Background note: The Group of Creditors of Ukraine includes Canada, France, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, and the United States of America.

Observers to the Group include Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Korea, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland

14 September 2022 - Debt Relief for Ukraine - Debt Service Suspension (Japan) 

27 September 2022 - US presses EU to speed up financial aid to Ukraine

IMF is separately working on new emergency funds for Kyiv. 

28 September 2022 - Biden approves an additional $1.1 billion in security assistance for Ukraine 

The Biden administration announced $1.1 billion in additional security assistance for Ukraine on Wednesday, bringing the U.S. commitment to more than $16.2 billion since Russia’s invasion in late February.

The announcement of the upcoming aid package, the 22nd such installment, follows referendums held in four Russian-occupied regions of Ukraine that are backed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

27 March 2023 - The Government of Ukraine approved a memorandum with the IMF and its G7 creditors – loan guarantees and postponement of debt payments until 2027.

The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine approved the government’s and the National Bank’s draft letter of intent to the IMF and the draft Memorandum on Economic and Financial Policy. Minister of Finance Serhii Marchenko must sign the specified letter.

In turn, a group of Ukraine’s creditors from the G7 countries and members of the Paris Club (GCU) have provided financial guarantees for the IMF program to restore the country’s macroeconomic stability.

In addition, the moratorium on the payment of Ukraine’s debts has been extended from August 1, 2022, for the duration of the IMF program (2023-2027). In July 2022, the Group of Creditors announced its intention to suspend principal and interest payments on bilateral debts from August 1, 2022, until the end of 2023, with the possibility of extending the suspension for another year.


The meme "Until the last Ukrainian" = "Save creditors before haircuts"   

It is unclear if in a case of messy default Ukrainian debt would be honoured.

It is unclear that the Ukrainian state would have successor 

or a one which would be able to pay its debts.

It is unclear what would happen with debts if Ukraine dissolves,

soe regions become part of Russia.

Russia does not recognize the legitimacy of Ukrainian government,

therefore it will not honor its debts.  


- Music -
- Default - All over me -

Concluding remark: The latest WaPo news from spin doctors

 is that Ukrainian did it and UA official coordinated the mission. 

Here is my take on the issue ,

and how I may have caused that news to appear.

.RELATED POSTS:




***

***
Uncovering the truth took over two years of self-funded, tireless investigation.
I decided to open it for free, no paywall, despite huge investment.
Because the truth matters.
Please consider supporting my work with a donation.

Every bit helps keep this mission alive!

(retweet and follow)

Saturday, November 18, 2023

084 - The UN and The Nord Stream Incident: Closed Consultations

 Posted Tue 7 Nov 2023 by securitycouncilreport

Tomorrow afternoon (8 November), Security Council members will convene for closed consultations regarding the 26 September 2022 explosions that caused physical damage to the Nord Stream pipelines in the Baltic Sea. Russia requested the meeting to discuss what it considers a lack of information sharing by Denmark, Germany, and Sweden on their ongoing national investigations, and opposition from some Council members to a draft presidential statement it proposed on this issue in September. A representative from the UN Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs (DPPA) may brief.

The meeting will be held following a briefing that Russia has called for on Ukraine to discuss an incident that occurred today in which shelling by Ukrainian forces reportedly killed six people and injured at least 11 others in the city of Donetsk. A DPPA representative is expected to brief. Ukraine is expected to participate under rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure.

Background on the Nord Stream Pipelines

Nord Stream is a set of offshore natural gas pipelines, comprising Nord Stream 1 (NS1) and Nord Stream 2 (NS2), which run from Russia to Germany through the Baltic Sea. The NS1 pipelines became fully operational in 2012, while the NS2 pipelines were completed in September 2011 but never put into service, partly over concerns regarding the EU’s reliance on Russian energy. Gazprom, a Russian state-owned energy company, holds a majority stake in NS1 and is the owner of NS2.

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the EU imposed significant sanctions on Russia’s energy sector. Moscow has retaliated by reducing its energy supply to Europe on several occasions since the start of the war. It also shut down the NS1 pipeline twice, delaying its resumption due to Western sanctions.

Between 26 and 29 September 2022, four leaks were detected in NS1 and NS2, near the island of Bornholm in Denmark. When the damage occurred, the pipelines reportedly held several hundred million cubic meters of natural gas, even though NS2 was not operational. The leaks occurred in international waters within the economic zones of Denmark and Sweden. Following the incident, Danish, German, and Swedish officials launched separate investigations into the leaks. Russia expressed interest in joining the investigations, citing concerns that the leaks may have been a deliberate act of terrorism. In October 2022, the Danish Police reported that “powerful explosions” caused the damage, according to preliminary findings. On 18 November 2022, Swedish authorities reported that the pipelines had been subject to “gross sabotage”, adding that “foreign items” containing “explosive residue” were found near the site.

The Council has engaged on the Nord Stream issue several times since the September 2022 incident. Russia convened a Security Council briefing on 30 September 2022, during which Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development in the Department of Economic and Social Affairs Navid Hanif noted that the UN was “not in a position to verify or confirm any of the reported details related to the incident”. On 21 February, Russia convened another meeting following the publication of an article by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh on 8 February. In that article, Hersh attributed the Nord Stream explosion to a covert mission carried out by US Navy divers, while claiming that Norway provided a base for the mission and collaborated with the US on military and intelligence activities. The White House described Hersh’s allegations as “utterly false and complete fiction”. On 7 March, the New York Times reported that US officials had reviewed new intelligence indicating that a pro-Ukrainian group may have been responsible for the Nord Stream explosion—a claim rejected by Kyiv.

On 27 March, the Security Council voted on a draft resolution on the Nord Stream incident (S/2023/212). The draft text, prepared by Russia and co-sponsored by several UN member states—including Belarus, China, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), Eritrea, Nicaragua, Syria, and Venezuela—condemned the “act of sabotage” on NS1 and NS2 and expressed concern over the environmental and economic consequences of the gas leak resulting from the explosions. The text requested the Secretary-General to establish an international, independent commission to investigate the incident and identify its perpetrators and accomplices. It also encouraged member states, including those conducting national investigations, to cooperate and share information with the proposed commission. The draft resolution failed to be adopted because it did not garner the requisite support. It received three votes in favour (Brazil, China, and Russia) and 12 abstentions. (For background, see our 26 March What’s in Blue story.)

Russia subsequently convened four Council meetings to discuss the Nord Stream incident: two meetings under “any other business” on 15 and 27 June, and two briefings on 11 July and 26 September.

After the 26 September briefing, Russia proposed a draft presidential statement on the incident. Following several weeks of difficult negotiations, it appears that Russia withdrew the draft text from consideration. Nonetheless, Russia said it would continue raising the Nord Stream incident and the investigations concerning the issue at the Security Council.

Tomorrow’s Meeting and Negotiations on the Draft Presidential Statement

At tomorrow’s meeting, Russia is likely to criticise what it views as reluctance by Denmark, Germany, and Sweden to share information on their ongoing national investigations. In this regard, at a 16 October press briefing, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova accused the three countries of having “not provided any plausible information to the international community…[regarding] the preliminary results of their national investigations”. In contrast, other Council members may note that Denmark, Germany, and Sweden have issued joint letters to the Council on several occasions, providing updates on the status of their respective investigations. In a 10 July letter to the Council (S/2023/517), the three countries stated that the Russian authorities have been informed about the ongoing investigations.

Russia may also criticise what it perceives as resistance from certain Council members to engage on its draft presidential statement. That text described the incident as an act of terrorism, determined that it constituted a threat to international peace and security, and underscored the need for an impartial investigation. 

It also urged Denmark, Germany, and Sweden to expedite their national investigations and to cooperate with Russian authorities and the Nord Stream operators. Several Council members are expected to contend that Russia failed to take their suggestions sufficiently into account.

Several sticking points among Council members prevented consensus on the draft text. It seems that some members advocated describing the incident as an act of sabotage rather than terrorism

There was reluctance among some members to declare the incident a threat to international peace and security, particularly before conclusive results were available

There were also diverging views on the need to establish an international investigation into the incident. Several members—including Albania, France, Japan, Malta, Switzerland, the UK, and the US—have maintained that they do not support establishing an international investigation while the national investigations continue.

Several members also expressed concern over the inclusion of language underscoring the need for impartial investigations, cautioning that such wording could be perceived as casting doubt on the efficiency and impartiality of the ongoing national investigations

The US and several European members have previously emphasised the need to allow the investigative processes to be concluded without external interference.


Summary and comparison to my investigation:

- There is a legal difference between "sabotage" and "terrorist act". 
  The insurance claim will differ based on definition of the case (post about it)

- Yearly Maintenance checks are done by independent 3rd party companies.
  They are done for the purpose of yearly re-insurance (post about it)

- The fact that some started to claim it is "sabotage" compared to "terrorist act" shows some parties had a knowledge who has done it and why, it is also a reason why the case is not investigated as an international case - (post about it)

- Sanctions prevent collection of insurance claim and repairs (post about it)

- The Sy Hersh story of USA being the main suspect is not correct (post about it or here)


***

***
Uncovering the truth took over two years of self-funded, tireless investigation.
I decided to open it for free, no paywall, despite huge investment.
Because the truth matters.
Please consider supporting my work with a donation.

Every bit helps keep this mission alive!

(retweet and follow)

.

083 - The UK at the UN Security Council & Nordstream affair

26 September 2023 - It is not a good use of time for the Security Council to prejudge the outcome of Nord Stream investigations: UK statement at the Security Council

Statement by UK Political Coordinator Fergus Eckersley at the UN Security Council meeting on threats to international peace and security.

Madam President, the international community remains rightfully concerned about the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines. We’ve repeatedly condemned this attack and we all want clear answers.

[MRT: Condemnation of sabotage is a really a bad punishment /s. The UK has never called for punishing perpetrators. Why not to make UN meeting and vote who wants perpetrators to be punished as not punishing would bring a reference precedent in future?] 

That’s why we support the national investigations of Germany, Denmark, and Sweden to determine who is responsible.

[MRT: If responsible are determined, will they be revealed to public? Will they be punished? For what? Who claims? Who were injured perties  RU, EU citizens, NS shareholders? I would demand clear explanation how not publishing is along int. law. I would vote on this at UN that a wide public focus is needed due to international law which does not provide 100% legal protection against such attacks - note NOR nationalized some pipelines as state ownership is better than private one, legally.]

In July, Germany, Denmark and Sweden offered a detailed update on the progress of their investigations. That update highlighted the unprecedented nature of the sabotage, and the subsequent complexity of the investigative processes.

[MRT: Actually there was not much data in the update but a postponement of results. If investigation is not released I would demand release of the investigative processes or probe if they follow int. law. I would demand release of a timeline. If not then delay of just process due to losses Gazprom is occurring for not being able to collect debt and repair pipelines.]

We understand these investigations will take time and we have full confidence in their impartiality and integrity.

[MRT: Sweden has said clearly that they investigate if SWE assets were used, if SWE territory was used. IF that is the case the SWE should never be allowed to self-investigate - post here

As we have said before, we do not believe it is a good use of our time for the Security Council to start to prejudge the outcome of these investigations, dictate how they are conducted, or otherwise undermine them.

We, and fellow Council members, should continue to offer our full support to these investigations so that we can establish who was responsible.

[MRT: International crime requires international investigation. Why are there no SUI, FRA, DUT investigations? Done these state care about insurance claims for their companies? Those pipelines are Key European infrastructure, how is it that EU is not investigating? It is a big question mark why is EU and other Nordstream shareholder countries not pushing for international investigation. Also, Switzerland´s voice is surprisingly absent all the time. Those companies are incorporated in Switzerland then claim and court should actually be in Switzerland. There is no Swiss investigation. Could this be because if the investigation reveals low legal protection of undersea infrastructure that SUI could experience outflow of companies incorporated there for their neutral status?] 


OLDER UNSECURITY NEWS 

21 February 2022 - Russian Security Council initiative an attempt to distract from ongoing Russian aggression in Ukraine: UK Statement in the Security Council 

Statement delivered by Thomas Phipps at the United Nations Security Council meeting on the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage

President, the UK condemns the acts of sabotage targeting the Nord Stream pipeline. However, it is not clear to us why, five months on, Russia is suddenly pursuing this issue here with such urgency.

[MRT: Everybody knows who has done it, latest since the day 1, some a few days earlier as shown in this post. Here is why others knew it latest on 06-10-2022 - post

We welcome the letter from Denmark, Sweden and Germany, informing UN member states that investigations are ongoing. The UK fully supports these technical investigations led by competent national authorities and awaits their findings.

[MRT: SWE investigator stated that it is possible that results will not be published due to national security issues here. International investigation would not have such constraints.] 

The only recent development regarding Nord Stream of which we are aware is a new round of lurid accusations by Russian state-controlled media and public figures, and these are the same actors that originally chose to accuse the UK.

[MRT: Russia may have evidence. These 3 preliminary investigations need to be first finished before court is stablished. Russia is not a party to investigations and considers those attacks as "state terrorist acts".]  

The basis for these new accusations is an article by an American journalist, that cites only a single secret source and it’s no surprise the Russian ambassador chose not dwell on the details as these details have been comprehensively debunked already by other journalists including on the basis of very straightforward, open-source fact-checking.

[MRT: Interestingly it was a UK press that started the idea that detonators were used and explosives did not have classical timers. Same scheme is described by Seymour Hersh.]   

It is therefore our view that the real reason for Russia’s urgency today is a desperate desire to distract attention one year on from the start of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. From the massive casualties suffered by the Russian military, and from the devastation Russia’s war has wrought on the people of Ukraine, as well as its effects across the globe.

[MRT: There is a hight probability that other actor than Ukraine or Russia were involved. This is therefore side-tracking invalid statement. Crime is a crime, legally only in 2 cases insurance is not valid - if the case of self sabotage (Russia did it) or if it was part of a war/conflict (Ukraine did it). Described here. Note that even if Russia would win the case it is unclear whether it would be allowed to collect on the insurance payment due to sanctions - described here

The UK takes the issue of attacks on critical infrastructure very seriously; it is why we have so frequently condemned in this Council, Russia’s attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, on Ukraine’s schools and on Ukraine’s hospitals. However, we are not convinced that Russia’s initiative today, or its calls for establishment of a UN Commission of Inquiry, amount to anything more than a distraction from its continuing aggression in Ukraine. 

[MRT: Only with a knowledge of who has done the damage and for what purpose a motive could be learned. Without it a statement of what the act was is impossible. This has been described here and here.]  

30 September 2022 - We will continue to work alongside our partners to protect Europe’s energy security

Statement by Ambassador James Kariuki at the UN Security Council meeting on the Nord Stream gas pipeline.

 I’d like to thank our briefers for setting out what we know so far about this case, which is still clearly very limited.

[MRT: My investigation shows that the perpetrator was known well in advance

Once again in this chamber, we have heard some absurd Russian claims and conspiracy theories this afternoon.

[MRT: Russia clearly stated that the suspect is the UK and Special Boat Services team, the list of Russian statements is here, UK suspect collection here 

Russia’s request for this meeting was a cynical attempt to distract from President Putin’s illegal annexation of Ukrainian territory today.

The damage to the Nordstream 1 and Nordstream 2 pipelines in the Baltic Sea is of deep concern.

[MRT: The UK has the best data, there are 3 HQs in Northwoods which collect all data, the Royeal Navy, the NATO and the JEF, data is here. ] 

These leaks are not only causing risks to shipping but also substantial environmental damage in the Baltic Sea. They are releasing enormous amounts of methane into the earth’s atmosphere.

We agree with the assessment that all currently available information indicates this damage is the result of sabotage. We strongly support the investigations by Denmark, Sweden and Germany.

[MRT: There is not assessment, unless it is known who did it and what were their motives it is not possible to draw such conclusion. Therefore who said in earliest moments that it was a clear "sabotage" had information who did it and was shaping narrative. Th data is collected here.] 

Intentional damage to civilian infrastructure is reckless and irresponsible, wherever it takes place. We must establish clear international norms that such damage is utterly unacceptable.

[The UK is here openly admitting that they KNOW that there are no clear norms and there is a grey area for such attacks - how else when Rishi Sunak himself has analysed this very issuue in 2017 for the case of British subsea cables, the issue same as for pipelines, just different owners. READ HERE] 

For NATO’s part, as set out in yesterday’s statement of the North Atlantic Council, Allies remain committed to prepare for, deter and defend against any hybrid tactics by state and non-state actors including coercive approaches to energy.

[MRT: Looks like calls to protect against possible "retaliation in kind". Perhaps the UK feels vulnerable?] 

We are clear that any deliberate attack against Allies’ critical infrastructure would be met with a united and determined response.

[MRT What about attacks against non NATO infrastructure?] 

The UK will continue to work alongside our partners to protect Europe’s energy security.

[MRT The UK has CONSIDERED on many occasions NORDSTREAM being a THREAT to Europe´s energy security - read here and here and here and here.] 

[Is the Uk just saying that they did it? That they would do it if RU again tries to hook Europe on cheap energy like before BoJo said? Will they again give Ultimatums to Germans?


Those Guilty should fear

Innocent could finally be free to joy 

Justice is coming!

 

What would I do?

If I was Russia I would put money in the game. Evaluate the damage and start to charge SWE, DK, GER for delays, for each day when the Nordstream can not be fixed due to delays with investigation, over reasonable time. Notify that latest extension till the end of the year is a final one or compare to Baltic connector timing. Abuse of process and/or other clauses.

I would also inform SWE, DK, GER that any further delays will be considered Obstruction of justice, as hiding evidence is clear intent of not publish, set a date and go forward with taking away the technical investigation into international one and investigate present politicians.

I would directly take away their arguments of not releasing data for own SWE security is denying the same for RU for their security and others and charge them for that also.

I would also prepare cases in Russia against these politicians who KNEW about the case BEFORE it happened as described here and here but kept it secret.

I would also prepare cases in Russia against all EU heads who decided jointly in Prague that the case will not be published as described here 


9 March 2022 -  Diplomatically, politically, economically – and eventually, militarily 

...Putin must fail in his invasion of Ukraine. The world is united in condemning the invasion and taking action.


Who does not love nice music?


RELATED POSTS:




***

***
Uncovering the truth took over two years of self-funded, tireless investigation.
I decided to open it for free, no paywall, despite huge investment.
Because the truth matters.
Please consider supporting my work with a donation.

Every bit helps keep this mission alive!

(retweet and follow)

Friday, November 17, 2023

082 - UK: Defence chief has 'serious' talks with PM and chancellor in face of cash squeeze and Ukraine war





13 November 2022 - Defence chief has 'serious' talks with PM and chancellor in face of cash squeeze and Ukraine war

VIDEO - here - 07:57 min

Defence chief has 'serious' talks with PM and chancellor in face of cash squeeze and Ukraine war

Admiral Sir Tony Radakin tells Sky News's Sophy Ridge on Sunday programme that Rishi Sunak "absolutely" understands the UK cannot have economic stability without security - and that comes at a price.

With the Ministry of Defence - like all other departments - under pressure to cut costs, Admiral Radakin said "numerous" conversations have been had over the past fortnight about the security situation in Europe and globally.

Speaking in an interview that was recorded on Friday, he told Sky News: "We specifically had an hour with the prime minister and the chancellor - and I accompanied the defence secretary - to talk about what would be the impact of a FINANCIAL SETTLEMENT and - to the richness and the seriousness of that conversation - recognising that this war in Europe is part of the reason why we have the level of inflation that we have and why we have the economic pressure.

[MRT: Financial settlement] 

"Therefore, in trying to deal with the economic pressure, we need to acknowledge that at its core is this security pressure in Europe.

"The government is having the right level of conversation to try and manage that, but also manage the security situation into the future."


***

***
Uncovering the truth took over two years of self-funded, tireless investigation.
I decided to open it for free, no paywall, despite huge investment.
Because the truth matters.
Please consider supporting my work with a donation.

Every bit helps keep this mission alive!

(retweet and follow)