Man bringt den Teil nur im Ticker:
Selenskyj appelliert nach russischen Angriffen an Nato
Der ukrainische Präsident hat nach den jüngsten Raketenangriffen Russlands die Nato um Hilfe gebeten. “Das ist Terror, den man stoppen kann und muss”, sagte Wolodymyr Selenskyj in einer Videobotschaft an das westliche Militärbündnis. Die Angriffe nannte er eine “Herausforderung für die Nato”.Er wiederholte die Darstellung von Oberbefehlshaber Walerij Saluschnyj, wonach russische Raketen durch den Luftraum Rumäniens geflogen seien. Rumänien dementierte das. Die russischen Raketen seien in 35 Kilometer Entfernung von der rumänischen Grenze über das Gebiet des Nachbarlands Moldau geflogen, teilte das rumänische Verteidigungsministerium mit. Das Land gehört sowohl der EU als auch der Nato an.
src: click
Was ist doch eine erneute Lüge um den Nato Bündnisfall auszulösen unter Freunden? Sowas ignoriert man doch in den scheiß Hurenwichserdrecksmedien einfach weg.
Oh und für die die Naftali Bennett nicht gelesen haben. Ihr müsst die Aussagen schon selbst lesen die scheiß HURENWICHSER DRECKSSCHWEINE von Medien irgnorieren die einfach weg.
Sterbt endlich ihr verfickten, verdreckten, verhurten scheiß Wichserschweine.
You enter Putin’s palace, which is surreal, he’s with people… you know…
-Tell me what went on there.
It began before that.
Before the war, maybe two months, I met with Putin for the first time in Sochi.
The meeting was around five-six hours long. And he - we discussed many topics, including general topics such as military history and the role of the USSR in World War II.
He likes the fact that I voice the truth, that the main force that defeated the Nazis, make no mistake, was the USSR, the Red Army.
-Do you say that because you know it will flatter him?
I say it because it’s true historically.
-But did you know you’d say that?
I didn’t know enough about him, I read a book about him, etc…
I bought it at Barnes & Noble - In view of the meeting.
-Yes.
But I certainly knew the meaning of World War II, they call it the Great Patriotic War.
It’s at the core of the Russian ethos, especially for Putin.
Oder wie die verfickten scheiß huren Drecksmedien mit Hinweis auf ungesicherte Quellen berichten würden “Covidisolierter Putin auf Zaren-Trip im Isolationskoller”.
He likes Jews very much.
He had Jewish neighbors
Who raised him as a kid.
-Yes.
-His teacher who lives in Israel.
And he did a very nice thing,
-He bought her an apartment…
Yes.
There are two sides to him, I’m not denying the other side. The racist side.
-Did he wear a sweatsuit?
At the end of the conversation he said, “let’s walk along the shore.”
So we did, the estate in Sochi is huge. It’s a resort town.
–Was this on Friday?
Yes. And we walked along the shore.
-Just so the listeners know, this was before the war.
Yes.
-You’re walking on the shore…
And he said, “I never invite people to my private home on the estate, but I’m inviting you.”
I can’t say for sure if that’s true or not.
He took me in the house, there was an ‘N’ shaped bar.
And two interesting things happened at that bar.
Before that, two days before I left I got a call from this guy, Zelensky, the leader of Ukraine, I heard he’s a Jew, a comedian, Hanoch Daum turned prime minister…
Something like that.
-God forbid.
And he asked me nicely if I can ask Putin to talk to him, to meet with him.
I waited with that, we’ve been there some 5.5 hours, we’re talking, and then I say, oh, Zelensky asked me to ask you if you can meet.
He was the nicest man up to then and his gaze turned cold.
“They’re Nazis, they’re warmongers, I won’t meet him. “They’re pro-Nazis.”
Now, he has an entire theory and narrative surrounding this issue.
If we go back to World War II, Ukraine definitely was an accomplice at certain times…-Were you shocked by his answer?
I was surprised when his demeanor changed.
Second… he had liquor.
Now, I don’t like alcohol, whiskey and the like.
Wine is the most I can drink.
But the wine isn’t kosher.
Oder wie die verfickten scheiß Hurenwichserdrecksmedien mit Verweis auf ungesicherte Quellen berichten Würden - Hitler in der Vorbereitung des neuen Neoimperialismus.
How do you experience him in phone calls?
Very matter of fact.
There are two very different narratives.
He has one narrative and perception, Zelensky and the West have another.
The West sees Putin as an imperialist who wants to take over more places.
Once it’s Georgia, once here, once there.
-Dont reward the thug.
And if we don’t stop him in Ukraine he’ll go on to Poland and the Baltics.
Putin’s perception was, as early as that meeting in Sochi, even more so here - wait - when the Wall came down, we reached an agreement with NATO that they wouldn’t expand NATO and would not touch the belt countries that envelop Russia.
-“Don’t bring me NATO, my enemy or rival and why are you introducing Ukraine into NATO?”
Yes.
The story goes much deeper.
You know, the Americans, on a sidenote, the Americans have a centuries old doctrine called the Monroe Doctrine whereby the hegemony over the Western Hemisphere, North and South America, belongs to the USA.
As early as 200 years ago, they didn’t want France and Britain there.
-“Don’t come here.”
And to a degree that’s Putin’s perception, “Don’t come here, this is my backyard.”
I don’t presume to judge the perceptions, what I care about is Israel’s national interests and I wanted…
I knew that if I don’t take some other action I’ll be forced to supply weapons and I’m endangering the Jews and…
So I called the Americans, Blinken, Biden and Sullivan, the Nat’l Security Advisor,and I said, “I have Putin’s ear, I can be a pipeline.”
Zelensky initiated the request to contact Putin.
Zelensky called me and asked me to contact Putin.
I have the protocol.
-What for?
To help.
-As the war is ongoing.
Yes, and he was in distress.
Keep in mind, he knows that his days are numbered, that he’ll be killed.
It wasn’t hard to kill him.
It wasn’t hard to kill him.
The Russians had demands, one was denazification, meaning replacement of the leader, and I assume the world understood that this means killing him.
There was a disarmament - emptying Ukraine out of weapons and army.
-There were 5-6 demands at first.
Yes.So Zelensky calls you.
“Can you help me?”
At the time I was meeting with Scholz, the new chancellor of Germany who replaced Angela Merkel.
They’re both excellent and very different.
Scholz is a man of few words.
Not that Angela was a big talker, but he…
-You’re meeting him in Germany?
No, in Jerusalem.-Oh right.
So we have the first meeting and he’s very distressed because there’s the gas issue, he fears for Germany’s energy and the ramifications.
I tell him about my discussions with Putin and…
and Putin says, “we can reach a ceasefire.”
So I start talks back and forth, Putin-Zelensky, Zelensky-Putin.
-On the phone.Yes.
What happens in these phone calls?
What happens…
-What’s your suggestion?What happens is this, drafts are exchanged, not only through us, directly as well.
They’re in Belarus, in a city called Gomel.
There are two negotiation teams – Russia and Ukraine, that the world looked down on, but I considered it a good thing that they were talking and exchanging…
And I try to find solutions.
I’m very skilled at negotations from my corporate life and politics and I can procure deals.
Moreover, I realize we’re on borrowed time, I said that we’re on the verge of another Kafr Kanna.
I’ll explain what I mean to the listeners.
-An unplanned security escalation.
An extreme situation will occur whereby many civilians will be killed and then it will be very hard to reach a ceasefire.It was very hard as it is.
-Yes.So I called it the “Kafr Kanna” affair.
I explained it to the Americans.
Everything I did was fully coordinated with Biden, with Macron, with Boris Johnson, with Scholz and obviously with Zelensky.
But I want to…
-Did they think you could succeed?I have a debate about that with the Americans, I just…
I think there was a chance and I’ll explain, they say there was no chance.
But there are two questions:
Was there a chance and was it justifiable?-Maybe they didn’t want you to succeed.
-Talk about the compromise you thought you could achieve before talking about the meeting itself.
There were a few issues, the major issues.
When I met with Putin he made two big concessions that are obvious now, they weren’t at the time.
-During the first meeting.No, at the meeting…
-On Saturday.I’ll go into that, but first, he renounced the denazification.
-I.e., taking out Zelensky.
Yes.-He said it in those words?
That’s why it’s so - a leader’s life is invaluable and I knew that Zelensky was under threat.
He was in a secret bunker, so 3-4 hours into the meeting, I’m getting to the meeting now, I asked, “what’s with - are you going to kill Zelensky?”
He said, “I won’t kill Zelensky.”Then I said, I have to understand that you’re giving your word that you won’t kill Zelensky.”
“I won’t kill Zelensky.”
After the meeting, in the car from the Kremlin to the airport, I contacted Zelensky by WhatsApp or Telegram.
-Didn’t you fear the Russians would see?
No.He has no problem because I was - no, the premise is…
-They can see. So you call him.I call Zelensky and say, “I came out of a meeting, he’s not going to kill you.” He asks, “are you sure?” “100%, he won’t kill you.”
Two hours later Zelensky went to his office and filmed himself there on his phone, “I’m not afraid…”
Anyways, that was one concession. The other was that he renounced disarmament of Ukraine.
Zelensky made a big concession that Saturday too.
I think this was the second Saturday after the war broke out.
The war broke out on a Thursday, the next Saturday
I was in Moscow, Zelensky relinquished joining NATO.He said, “I’m renouncing that.”
These are huge steps on each side.
Huge concessions.
The war broke out because of the demand to join NATO and Zelensky said, “I’m renouncing that.”
Then what’s left… a lot.
There was - the most complex issue, is the territorial issue.
Donbas, the Crimean Peninsula, Crimea, and the corridor that was forming between the two.
-In Mariupol.
And the second issue was - how will Ukraine protect itself and guarantees.
Ukraine demanded of Russia that it be able to get security guarantees from America, France, all the big ones.
And there was an argument, because to Russia a guarantee is a pact, it’s no different than NATO.
This is where I brought my experience, I gave it a lot of thought and said, the negotiation is unreasonable because they’re negotiating over something they don’t have.
There’s the joke about a guy trying to sell the Brooklyn Bridge to passersby.
This guy did exist.
100 years ago he sold…
-They don’t have the Brookyln Bridge.
I said that because…
America will give you guarantees?It will commit that in seven years, if Russia violates something, it will send soldiers after leaving Afghanistan and all that?
I said, “Volodymyr, it won’t happen, you won’t get guarantees, why are you negotiating?”
Then I suggested what I called the “Israeli model.”
We don’t have guarantees.
I said, “I’m the prime minister of Israel, “we don’t have guarantees from anyone, if someone invades us tomorrow, nobody has assured us and no one will come to save us. What we do have is a strong, independent army that can protect itself, so let’s forget about these guarantee and discuss the parameters for building military force, what kind of weapons, what planes, how many officers, soldiers…”
Because Russia doesn’t want Ukraine…
So this was a cognitive breakthrough that they both accepted.
Again, it took time and then you’re discussing which missiles, these are assault missiles, what do you need that for…
The territorial issue is
-And this is pre Kafr Kanna, pre Bucha.
Yes.
The Bucha massacre - once that happened I said, it’s over.
-Yes.I saw solutions in that regard too, I’d rather not go into that.
They’re primarily related to postponing the argument by 99 years.
All kinds of solutions in the middle.
Like David Avidan said, “everything takes time, time takes everything.”
-Yes.To affix…
-Yes.I knew from our rounds versus Gaza, versus Hizbollah, it’s very hard to reach a ceasefire.
Why is that?
As usual, because of the internal politics of each side.
Neither side can seem to be giving up, to be losing, to be weak.
So after Zelensky went to war - he didn’t go to war, after…
-Sustaining a blow.
Sustaining this war, now he’ll back down?-Does Putin say anything to you that you deem pragmatic?
He was very pragmatic, so was Zelensky.
-He wasn’t messianic.No, no.
-Give me an example of pragmatism.An example of pragmatism.
I won’t disclose things I shouldn’t, but he totally understood Zelensky’s political constraints.
And Zelensky was pragmatic too.
It doesn’t start at once, you have to peel the onion.
In every negotiation each side is all bravado -
-“I’ll rip ‘em apart,”
“I’ll rip ‘em apart.”“I’ll do this and that…”
Fine, okay.It’s a phase you can’t skip.
But once you say, “I understand” and you understand the perplexities, then you can gradually get to the crux of the matter…
-Yes.
-Let’s try to resume a chronological description.
-You leave on Saturday.
-I must say this is very indicative of your personality, striving to get there.-I mean, it’s so farfetched…
-Why do you even go there?
-That’s who you are…
I understand at that point that there’s no one else to mediate.
-Amazing.–There isn’t.
-It positions you at a high level of global endeavoring.
-Suddenly you’re a man that the world is talking about.
Yes.
-With this historic role and you say to yourself, later we’ll gauge if it’s true and why it didn’t work out, but you say, we have a window of opportunity, we’re preventing what we see now, millions of refugees, casualties, a country being destroyed and I can do something about it.
I’m cautious.
-What odds did you give it?50%.
–Was there 50%?
I think so.-And all this right after a call with Putin.
-Putin says to you, “come?”
Yes, he says “come.”
It was scheduled for a Saturday, we tried to change that, but…
I didn’t hesitate.
It was preserving life on a global scope and… Keep in mind, all my endeavors are protecting Israel from pressure that can harm us.–Instead of being on one side or another, you’re the mediator, so…
-You are not part of…Right, the third path.
-Did it cross your mind?Yes, yes.
-That’s thinking outside the box.
Yes.I’m not on either side,
I’m the mediator.–Right.
If I take sides, I can’t be a fair mediator.
-Why didn’t it work out?
Hold on.Then we travel in complete secrecy on this decrepit plane from Israel - through the Kazakh region, the Stans because we couldn’t fly over the Black Sea, a very long route. We pray and recite the Sabbath blessings.
It was very moving.
It was very cramped too, because the plane wasn’t - it was a private plane that we leased.
-Did Mossad arrange the trip?
Mossad and Hulata and poor things, all the - my guys are sitting on - it wasn’t comfy, we were extremely cramped.
We land at the Moscow airport, several officials welcome us and we go to the Kremlin.
By the way, it was my first time in Russia.
Besides Sochi, first time in Moscow.
It was a cold day, I think it was raining,
I see the Kremlin.
We get to this huge waiting area and I prepare my strategy in my mind.
I forgot to say that meanwhile I studied everything in depth.
The history, I read a book on the history of Ukraine and Russia to understand, I consulted with former leaders who dealt with this.
I consult a lot, I get Russian experts, negotiations experts, because when you get into something, and I knew the name of each village, Donbas and the history, what happened in 2014, in 2009, what happened all those years, because you can’t come in the middle of the story.
It’s also important in terms of your reliability vis a vis the leaders, they have to understand that you understand them.
You’re not agreeing with them, you understand.
Then we waited outside…
There were bowls with chocolates and cakes - yes, I definitely enjoyed those cakes.
I think it showed, huh?
-There was a time…
Then I went in to see Putin.Remember, this is at the height of COVID.
–Yes.
We sat at both ends of the table.
-He was scared of COVID, right?
I don’t know.
He stayed 20 meters away.There was a distance and there was a mic and speaker next to me.
Elkin looked like he had COVID.
There was the Russian interpreter and Elkin, they sat fairly far away from the table and translated and we started talking.
I understood the basic needs of each side, again, there were the initial phases at first and obviously I can’t go into detail, I’m just telling you what I can.
By the way, I think this is the first time I’m telling all this. And when you peel away…
I was under the impression that both sides very much want a ceasefire.And as I said, at that meeting, Putin made two big concessions after the original demands, he renounced disarmament and denazification and I say to myself, wow, this is a huge shift.
-So he’s not gung ho to fight at all costs.
No.
He has goals to achieve.That’s the impression I got.
-Yes.You have to be cautious, someone can always put on an act, I’m describing how I saw it.
I left very optimistic because he renounced joining NATO, which was the reason for the invasion.
Putin said, “tell me you’re not joining NATO, I won’t invade.”
He renounced his demands.
Then begins the - then I update everyone one after the other.
- You go to Germany, right?
From there I go to Germany, my first time in Germany.I made a point of never setting foot in Germany.
Because of the Holocaust.
Obviously I don’t blame today’s German people.
I arrive at…
-Scholz.Scholz’ office.
I’m there with Shimrit, the political advisor.
She did a great job through and through.
I must say, both she and Eyal Hulata were skeptical.
“What are you doing? Wait, take it slow…”
They’re young people.
-The three of you.
-Not that young, but…
They’re in their 40s.
-They’re not 70 with a political background, millions of conflicts…But they’re very intelligent, polite, and they think I’m going too fast.
And I disagree.
I say we’re going for it.
-Why was it important to go to Germany?
Because Germany is the player…
Germany and France are the major players in Europe.
And in order to procure an agreement,everyone has to do something.
There are so many things to do.
So I had dinner with him, I got kosher food, we sat with his nat’l security advisor.
We were taken from the airport by helicopter, it was weird flying over Berlin in a helicopter, but in all the trips, I went over…
I wrote down what happened because I couldn’t in real time.
I wrote a protocol of what we discussed and what the next steps would be.
What the disagreements are in the negotiations and what everyone has to do.
From there, I think that together, I’m not sure, we updated the Americans and Macron.
-“The Americans?”
-Biden himself or…No, usually it was Jake Sullivan, the nat’l security advisor, sometimes Biden, sometimes Blinken.
-They’re very tight there.
Yes.And Boris Johnson.
You know… each leader has their way.
Boris was… we can divide the spectrum of leaders, who’s tending more towards “now we have to fight Putin.”-Because we mustn’t reward the bad guys.
Right.
And who says, “forget war, everyone loses.”
-Right.
Boris Johnson adopted the aggressive line.
Macron and Scholz were more pragmatic and Biden was both.
And… that’s it.
Then I return to Israel and a negotiations marathon of drafts begins.
Now…
-Your office deals with this?-Not the foreign ministry or…
The NSC.And I do everything vis a vis… the NSC and… with Shimrit.
I update…
-Do you hold the NSC in high regard?-It’s what you make of it.
Yes, the short answer is yes. To Netanyahu’s credit, he built the NSC in a very good way.
It’s an excellent entity that supports the prime minister and has to report to the prime minister…it’s an excellent entity.
The NSC is the Nat’l Security Council.
-What do I want from the NSC?
Two things:I want it to tell me what should be on my radar.
What things I must pay attention to because the world is very… and do the administrative work.
-You want to do something?
There are always consequences. You can’t be impulsive. And whoever concedes then this country… and the other one caves.The Jordanians asked me…to approve introducing the Quran at the Temple Mount.
-I don’t have a clue.
-Is that good? Bad? What’s the history?So I never say yes on the spot.
“I’ll study it and get back to you with an answer.”
I think everyone should do that, not give answers on the spot, even though you want to please and…
-Yes.If you could you’d say “sure thing.”
–Yes.
-Then you get back, it was a good visit, he walks you to the car.
Yes, so I’m very cautious.
Take a breath,
say…
-By the way, Bibi is cautious too.
Yes.
Very cautious.
By the way, I noticed that throughout the Russia-Ukraine crisis Bibi didn’t attack me.
-Interesting.I think he realized we conducted a very intelligent policy. It went back and forth and then… I’ll say this in the broad sense, I think there was a legitimate decision by the West to keep striking Putin and not…
-“Strike Putin?”
-Putin was striking Ukraine.Hold on, yes, but given… I mean the more aggressive approach.
I’ll tell you something.I can’t say if they were wrong.
-Maybe other thugs in the world would see it.
My position at the time… in this regard, it’s not a national Israeli interest.
Unlike the consulate or Iran, when I’m concerned about Israel, I stand firm.
–Yes.
Here, I don’t have a say.
I’m just the mediator, but I turn to America in this regard, I don’t do as I please.
Anything I did was coordinated down to the last detail with the US, Germany and France.
-So they blocked it?
Basically, yes.They blocked it and I thought they’re wrong.
In retrospect, it’s too soon to know.
The advantages and disadvantages: The downside of the war going on is the casualties in Ukraine and Russia, it’s a very harsh blow to Ukraine[…]
Oder wie die SCHEISSHURENWICHSERMEDIEN berichten Würden Putin auf einem Imperialismustripp zwingt Selenskyj durch unhaltbare Forderungen die Verhandlungen abzubrechen.
Die Nato Osterweiterung war natürlich nur ein Vorwand. Dass Putin zu diesem Zeitpunkt vollkommen verrückt entrückt und nicht bereit zu verhandeln ist, wissen wir ja aus der Medienberichterstattung.
STERRBT ENDLICH.
edit: An der Stelle ist es vielleicht nochmal gut sich die US PR von Beginn des Krieges anzusehen.
“Wenn Putin Kiew nimmt, wird es mit der Diplomatie schwierig.” wurde zu “Sobald sich Russland von Kiew zurückgezogen hat, wurde Diplomatie unmöglich” weil sich vier Tage vor Butscha die ukrainische Position gedreht hat, nachdem der russische Verhandlungsführer den Rückzug als Zugeständnis an eine Verhandlungslösung verkauft hatte.
“Putin hatte Angst vor einer ökonomisch erfolgreichen Ukraine” wurde als Argument aus der “beim Euromaidan ging es nur um den EU Beitritt” Logik entwickelt, die Mearsheimer als “three prong” Logik anders gewichtet sieht. Der springende Punkt hierbei sind Vertragsbestandteile innerhalb des Beitrittsabkommens der Europäischen Union nach Artikel 42 Absatz 7 des EU Vertrages, die eine Beistandspflicht von Natostaaten garantiert - der Beitritt in die Europäische Union hat seit 2009 immer auch eine Beistandspflicht durch Natomitglieder zu Folge.
Die ökonomischen Prognosen für die Ukraine während der verbleibenden Lebenszeit von Putin waren laut IMF schlecht.
Kurzfassung: US Interessen haben zu Beginn des Krieges angedeutet, dass eine Eroberung Kiews eine diplomatische Lösung erschweren würde. Defakto war das Gegenteil der Fall.
US Interessen haben zu Beginn des Krieges das Motiv “die Ukraine wollte in die EU und nicht in die Nato” entworfen, während die Hoover Institution Mearsheimer zum selben Zeitpunkt 7 zu 0 in eigens entworfenen Talk Formaten diskreditiert haben, um die Rolle der Nato Osterweiterung als primären Standpunkt der Gegenseite zu diskreditieren. Measheimer durfte noch einmal im Economist publizieren und war dann Persona non Grata.
De-Nazifizierung war die innenpolitische Begründung für “Regime Change” von Russland (warum man in Kiew einen Regimewechsel eingeleitet hätte) - nicht der primäre Kriegsgrund.
Putin war auch nicht verrückt - man hat der Öffentlichkeit einfach die Russische Propaganda für Russland intern falsch erklärt. (Novorussia, De-Nazifizierung, …)
Putin hielt sich auch nicht für einen Zaren, sondern hatte Sorgen bezüglich des “Backyards” Russlands, sowie einer langen Landgrenze zur Nato, bei einem ständig schwelenden Konflikt. Das in “fürchtete sich vor einer positiven ökonomischen Entwicklung der Ukraine” umzuformen ist sinnverzerrend. Zum Einen da sie nicht prognostiziert war, zum anderen, da “backyard” auch andere Aspekte berührt. Siehe Bidens Interpretation von “frontyard”.
Selenskyj hat in späterer Folge “De-Nazifizierung” wiederholt als Grund benannt, warum die Ukraine und er persönlich nicht mit Putin verhandeln könnten. Diese Begründung war zu diesem Zeitpunkt bereits vorgeschobem, da der Ukraine bekannt war, dass von der russischen Seite auf diese Forderung bereits verzichtet wurde.
…
Dinge zu denen ein Armin Wolf nur einmal schlucken muss, und schon sind sie gesellschaftlich nicht mehr von Bedeutung.
