SearchRecent comments
Democracy LinksMember's Off-site Blogs |
eager to provide live target practice for the russians.....Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has announced that the UK is ready to play a “leading role” in providing security guarantees to Kiev and deploy troops to Ukraine as part of a peacekeeping mission, should a ceasefire agreement with Russia be reached. In an article for The Telegraph on Sunday, Starmer described the Ukraine conflict as a “once-in-a-generation moment” and an “existential” issue for Europe, justifying the potential deployment of British personnel. “The UK is ready to play a leading role in accelerating work on security guarantees for Ukraine… But it also means being ready and willing to contribute to security guarantees to Ukraine by putting our own troops on the ground if necessary,” the Prime Minister wrote. “I do not say that lightly. I feel very deeply the responsibility that comes with potentially putting British servicemen and women in harm’s way,” he added. “But any role in helping to guarantee Ukraine’s security is helping to guarantee the security of our continent, and the security of this country.” Starmer’s announcement comes as European leaders prepare to convene in Paris on Monday for emergency talks, prompted by US President Donald Trump’s recent push for a peace deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin and growing concerns over a potential reduction in US defense commitments in Europe. On Wednesday, Trump surprised Washington’s European allies with a lengthy call to Putin to discuss possible steps toward resolving the Ukraine conflict. Since then, the US State Department has circulated a document reportedly containing six questions to assess European nations’ willingness to commit to a long-term security arrangement for Kiev. “If third-country military forces were to be deployed to Ukraine as part of a peace arrangement, what would you consider to be the necessary size of such a European-led force?” was one of the questions, according to Reuters. Another question reportedly asked: “What additional capabilities, equipment, and maintenance sustainment options is your Government prepared to provide to Ukraine to improve its negotiating hand and increase pressure on Russia?” Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky claimed in January that Kiev needs “at least” 200,000 European soldiers as peacekeepers to enforce any potential agreement with Russia. However, analysts cited recently by the New York Times consider this figure unattainable, noting that deploying even 40,000 troops would be challenging. The Trump administration has repeatedly signaled its intent to minimize US involvement once a potential truce is reached, instead seeking to shift the financial and logistical burden of supporting Kiev onto regional allies. “To be clear, as part of any security guarantee, there will not be US troops deployed to Ukraine,” US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told the Ukraine Defense Contact Group last week. Moscow’s permanent representative to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, emphasized last week that no peacekeeping force can legally operate without a mandate from the UN Security Council. Senior Russian diplomat Rodion Miroshnik previously warned that “any contingent entering the territory of Ukraine without the consent and permission of Russia is a military target, with quite understandable consequences.” https://www.rt.com/news/612829-uk-troops-ukraine-starmer/
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.
Gus Leonisky POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.
HYPOCRISY ISN’T ONE OF THE SINS OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. HENCE ITS POPULARITY IN THE ABRAHAMIC TRADITIONS…
SEE ALSO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTzTheRD25M
SEE ALSO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nh7JEIqTlWc
SEE ALSO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPaQV35nFz8
|
User login |
outta reach....
Washington expects to be reimbursed by Kiev for the “investments” it has made in the Ukraine conflict, US National Security Adviser Michael Waltz told Fox News on Sunday. He argued that repaying the American people would be the best way for the country to ensure continued assistance in the future.
Waltz’s remarks came after Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky reportedly “politely declined” to sign a document granting the US rights to 50% of his country’s future mineral reserves, allegedly seeking a “better deal.”
US President Donald Trump has recently demanded the “equivalent of $500 billion worth of rare earths”from Ukraine in exchange for what he estimates to be “more than $300 billion” that Washington has provided to Kiev in various forms of aid amid its conflict with Moscow.
“The American people deserve to be recouped, deserve to have some type of payback for the billions they have invested in this war,” Waltz said on Sunday. “I can’t think of anything that would make the American people more comfortable with future investments than if we were able to be in a partnership and have the American people made whole.”
The top adviser added that Zelensky “would be very wise to enter into this agreement with the United States.”
Zelensky has previously stated that he wants to establish a mutually beneficial “partnership” rather than simply handing over Ukraine’s natural resources. Meanwhile, his prime minister, Denis Shmigal, has proposed granting the EU access to Ukraine’s resources in exchange for cooperation with Kiev and investments in the country’s reconstruction.
Waltz also claimed that the US “has borne the brunt” of Western military and financial aid to Kiev. Officially, the US Congress has authorized roughly $175 billion for Ukraine since 2022, though a significant portion of that funding has gone to American industries and government activities related to the conflict.
According to Germany’s Kiel Institute for the World Economy, as of October 2024, the US had provided Ukraine with approximately $92 billion in financial and military assistance, while EU nations and the UK had allocated a combined $131 billion.
A 2024 World Economic Forum report noted that Ukraine “holds immense potential as a major global supplier of critical raw materials” essential for defense, high-tech, and the green energy industries. The country has Europe’s largest titanium and lithium reserves, although these are not classified as rare earth elements.
Zelensky has previously acknowledged that much of Ukraine’s mineral-rich territory is now under Russian control. According to Forbes, around $7 trillion worth of Ukraine’s former mineral wealth is located in the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, which joined Russia in 2022.
https://www.rt.com/news/612828-us-payback-ukraine-investments/
READ FROM TOP.
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.
Gus Leonisky
POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.
HYPOCRISY ISN’T ONE OF THE SINS OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.
HENCE ITS POPULARITY IN THE ABRAHAMIC TRADITIONS…
hypocrites...
UK Special Forces command rejected resettlement applications from more than 2,000 Afghan commandos who had shown credible evidence of service in units that fought alongside the SAS and SBS, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed for the first time.
UK Special Forces officers appear to have rejected every application from a former Afghan commando referred to them for sponsorship, despite the Afghan units having fought with the British on life-threatening missions against the Taliban.
The MoD had previously denied there was a blanket policy to reject members of the units - known as the Triples - but the BBC has not been able to find any evidence that UK Special Forces (UKSF) supported any resettlement applications.
Asked if UKSF had supported any applications, the MoD declined to answer the question.
The Triples - so-called because their designations were CF 333 and ATF 444 - were set up, trained, and paid by UK Special Forces and supported the SAS and SBS on operations in Afghanistan. When the country fell to the Taliban in 2021, they were judged to be in grave danger of reprisal and were entitled to apply for resettlement to the UK.
The rejection of their applications was controversial because it came at a time when a public inquiry in the UK was investigating allegations that British Special Forces had committed war crimes on operations in Afghanistan where the Triples were present.
The inquiry has the power to compel witnesses who are in the UK, but not non-UK nationals who are overseas. If resettled, former members of the Triples could be compelled by the inquiry to provide potentially significant evidence.
BBC Panorama revealed last year that UK Special Forces command had been given veto power over their resettlement applications and denied them asylum in Britain. The revelation caused a wave of anger among some former members of the SAS and others who served with the Afghan units.
The MoD initially denied the existence of the veto, suggesting that the BBC's reporting had been inaccurate, but then-Defence Minister Andrew Murrison was later forced to tell the House of Commons the government had misled parliament in its denials.
The confirmation of the more than 2,000 rejections emerged in court hearings earlier this month during a legal challenge brought by a former member of the Triples. Lawyers for the MoD applied for a restriction order which temporarily prevented the BBC from reporting on the relevant parts of the proceedings, before withdrawing their application last week under challenge.
Documents disclosed in court also showed that at the same time the MoD was denying the existence of the veto, it already knew that every rejection decision made by UK Special Forces was potentially unsound and would have to be independently reviewed.
Mike Martin MP, a member of the defence select committee and former British Army officer who served in Afghanistan, told the BBC the rejections were "extremely concerning".
"There is the appearance that UK Special Forces blocked the Afghan special forces applications because they were witnesses to the alleged UK war crimes currently being investigated in the Afghan inquiry," Martin said.
"If the MoD is unable to offer any explanation, then the matter should be included in the inquiry," he added.
Johnny Mercer, the former Conservative MP for Plymouth Moor View, who served alongside the SBS in Afghanistan, testified to the Afghan inquiry that he had spoken to former members of the Triples and heard "horrific" allegations of murder by UK Special Forces.
Mercer said it was "very clear to me that there is a pool of evidence that exists within the Afghan [special forces] community that are now in the United Kingdom that should contribute to this Inquiry".
The MoD began a review last year of all 2,022 resettlement applications referred to and rejected by UK Special Forces. All contained what MoD caseworkers on the resettlement scheme regarded as "credible" evidence of service with the Triples units.
The government said at the time that the review would take 12 weeks, but more than a year later it has yet to be completed. Some rejections have already been overturned, allowing former Triples to come to the UK. But the MoD has refused to inform the Afghan commandos whether they are in scope of the review or if their rejections were upheld, unless they write to the MoD.
Many are in hiding in Afghanistan, making it difficult to obtain legal representation or pro-actively contact the MoD. Dozens have reportedly been beaten, tortured, or killedby the Taliban since the group regained control of the country.
"Although decisions have been overturned, it's too late for some people," said a former Triples officer. "The delays have caused a lot of problems. People have been captured by the Taliban or lost their lives," he said.
The officer said that the Afghan commandos worked alongside British Special Forces "like brothers" and felt "betrayed" by the widespread rejections.
"If Special Forces made these rejections they should say why. They should have to answer," he said.
The MoD is now facing a legal challenge to aspects of the review, including the decision not to inform applicants whether their case is being reviewed or disclose the criteria used to select those in scope.
The legal challenge is being brought by a former senior member of the Triples who is now in the UK, on behalf of commandos still in Afghanistan.
"Our client's focus is on his soldiers left behind in Afghanistan, some of whom have been killed while they wait for these heavily delayed protection decisions," said Dan Carey, a partner at the law firm Deighton Pierce Glynn.
"As things stand they have a right to request a reassessment of a decision they haven't even been told about. And there are others who think they are part of the Triples Review when the secret criteria would tell them that their cases aren't even being looked at."
Lawyers acting for the former member of the Triples also heavily criticised the level of disclosure in the case by the MoD, which has not handed over any documentation from within UK Special Forces or government records about the decision-making process that led to the rejections.
In court filings, they criticised the "total inadequacy" of the MoD's disclosure, calling it an "an obvious failure to comply with the duty of candour and to provide necessary explanation" of the process.
New evidence that emerged last week in court also showed that the MoD appeared to have rejected out of hand some applicants who served with UK Special Forces in Afghanistan after 2014 - when Britain's conventional armed forces left Helmand province - without even referring them to UK Special Forces headquarters for sponsorship.
The MoD has not explained the reasoning behind the policy, which was kept secret from applicants. A spokesperson for the MoD said that after 2014 the UK's role "evolved from combat operations to primarily training, advising and assisting CF 333, who were under the command of the Afghan Ministry of Interior".
But officers who served with UK Special Forces told the BBC that the Triples continued to support British-led operations after 2014.
"Saying the Triples didn't support UK Special Forces operations after 2014 isn't true at all," said former officer who served with UKSF.
"We had a squadron of CF 333 with us. We worked closely together. These were NATO targets, UK planned operations," he said.
The Ministry of Defence has previously told the BBC: "There has been no evidence to suggest that any part of the MoD has sought to prevent former members of the Afghan specialist units from giving evidence to the inquiry."
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy9l9elr95zo
YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.
Gus Leonisky
POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.
HYPOCRISY ISN’T ONE OF THE SINS OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.
HENCE ITS POPULARITY IN THE ABRAHAMIC TRADITIONS…