harlekin.me

Repor­ter wat­ched RT for a day, here is what he found:

Here’s a break­down of what I obser­ved on the network.

Rus­sia the “libe­ra­tor”: Peter John Lavel­le, the host of RT’s signa­tu­re talk pro­gram, “Cross­talk,” put it like this: He said that the fai­led “libe­ral order” imple­men­ted by the West was to bla­me. “It is so irri­ta­ting,” Lavel­le said on his show. “The way it is being framed: Ukraine’s demo­cra­cy. Well, it has not­hing to do with Ukraine’s demo­cra­cy — if you can say it even has one… This is about secu­ri­ty… The­re is only secu­ri­ty for other countries.”

Mis­sing from coverage: Noti­ce­ab­ly left out of the coverage was a focus on how unbe­ara­ble life has been for Ukrai­ni­ans who­se cities are under attack by unrelen­ting Rus­si­an for­ces. I did not see much coverage showing the dama­ge that Rus­si­an for­ces have cau­sed as they try to sei­ze con­trol of the coun­try. Or coverage about the resi­dents of cities such as Kyiv who live in ter­ror and sleep under­ground in bomb shel­ters. Or coverage about the hund­reds of thousands who have sim­ply cho­sen to flee the coun­try for their safe­ty. Tho­se incon­ve­ni­ent facts were not the empha­sis of the nar­ra­ti­ve RT pushed.

Also left out of RT’s coverage: The rami­fi­ca­ti­ons the West’s sanc­tions and other actions are having on Russia’s economy.

src: click

Libe­ra­tor ins­tead of aggres­sor or warcri­mi­nal - being the pre­text to incor­rect­ly sug­gest, that rus­sia hasnt vio­la­ted inter­na­tio­nal law.

Apart from that, what the jour­na­list is mis­sing is images of peop­le suf­fe­ring in cities that have been atta­cked by Rus­sia, espe­cial­ly in Kiev.

The secu­ri­ty poli­tics ang­le aspect that irri­ta­tes the aut­hor, also is pushed - as a respon­se, and in ser­vice of future stra­te­gic ori­en­ta­ti­on, in wes­tern media. (“The EU is lear­ning the lan­guage of Power” (The ger­man news­pa­per in it links an ECFR com­men­ta­ry “from the per­spec­ti­ve of a mill­en­ni­al”, thats actual­ly qui­te fit­ting.)) - alt­hough with it being seen through a very dif­fe­rent lens, naturally.

So far thats the ent­i­re­ty, of what that jour­na­list has found in terms of war pro­pa­gan­da being in place.

So the quick sum­ma­ry would be that CNN expec­ted rus­si­an sta­te finan­ced media to report, that Putin is the aggres­sor, did vio­la­te inter­na­tio­nal law, tell peop­le that this was a war crime, to not imple­ment a rever­sal on the publi­ci­zed image of victims/aggressors and show images of peop­le suf­fe­ring, while their army was taking towns by for­ce (as well as put­ting cities under siege).

Oh, and rus­si­an sta­te finan­ced media also didnt report on finan­cial sanc­tions that are aimed at tur­ning public opi­ni­on. (Rus­si­an news agen­ci­es do in part but only to a very vai­led extend. (I’m not lin­king examp­les.) Inte­rest rates rising from 10 to 20%, limits on money with­dra­wal for indi­vi­du­als, bans on exch­an­ging amounts lar­ger than 10.000 USD into for­eign cur­ren­ci­es - are effects they are witnessing.)

Next, CNN might find out that _if_ the Kyiv government buil­ding is taken over, a pon­zi government might decla­re Ukrai­ne to be part of the rus­si­an fede­ra­ti­on, but that RT is not tel­ling the world that the legi­ti­ma­te ruler of the coun­try is still batt­ling to res­to­re Ukrai­nes bor­ders pri­or to the rus­si­an invasion.

Also CNN has found that rus­si­ans are bra­cing for a dra­ma­tic shift in their stan­dard of living, because:

On Tues­day, Apple said it had stop­ped sel­ling all of its pro­ducts in Rus­sia, fol­lowing simi­lar moves by car and truck makers inclu­ding Ford, Gene­ral Motors, Vol­vo, Renault and Jagu­ar. Wes­tern oil giants Shell and BP ended joint ven­tures with Rus­si­an coun­ter­parts ear­lier this week. Dis­ney, along with War­ner­Me­dia, CNN’s parent com­pa­ny, are pausing the release of films in Russia.

Com­po­un­ding the eco­no­mic pain, two of the world’s big­gest con­tai­ner ship­ping com­pa­nies, Maer­sk and MSC, said they are hal­ting car­go boo­kings to and from Rus­sia, with the excep­ti­on of food, medi­ci­ne and huma­ni­ta­ri­an supplies.

Tho­se depar­tures, com­bi­ned with the plun­ging value of the ruble, threa­ten to cho­ke Russia’s eco­no­my and depri­ve Rus­si­ans of cru­cial for­eign goods such as cars, cell­p­ho­nes, clot­hing and food. Alt­hough Russia’s eco­no­my is pri­ma­ri­ly dri­ven by exports of oil and natu­ral gas, it reli­es hea­vi­ly on imports of finis­hed con­su­mer products.
Russia’s cur­ren­cy plun­ged by about 25% Monday[…]

src: click

25% is also about the exchan­ge rate drop to USD in the last mon­th (over­all), Chi­na just swit­ched from refu­sing to call the inva­si­on an inva­si­on to the fol­lowing stance:

[For­eign Minis­ter] Wang said the world’s second lar­gest eco­no­my also “deplo­res the out­break of con­flict bet­ween Ukrai­ne and Rus­sia,” accord­ing to a state­ment pos­ted on the Minis­try of For­eign Affairs web­site. The remarks were publis­hed after a call bet­ween Wang and Ukrai­ni­an For­eign Minis­ter Dmy­t­ro Kule­ba, the most seni­or exchan­ge sin­ce Russia’s Vla­di­mir Putin laun­ched the inva­si­on Thursday.

Wang also ack­now­led­ged the con­flict was a “war,” rather than a “spe­cial mili­ta­ry ope­ra­ti­on” as descri­bed by Rus­sia. [Seen as poten­ti­al signa­ling, that chi­na could be inte­res­ted in assuming the role of a peacemaker.]

src: click

and Rus­si­as Food import depen­den­ci­es as of 2015 (accord­ing to the world­bank), loo­ked like this (- but then Rus­sia is also still deli­vering fos­si­le fuels to some of tho­se coun­tries, the amount of which will con­tract over the fol­lowing ten years):

src: click In addi­ti­on rus­sia is also a lar­ge food exporter. see: click

edit: After the block of car­go ship­ments from and to rus­sia by MSC and Maerks, a chief exe­cu­ti­ve of a danish tra­ding com­pa­ny went on record with the fol­lowing statement:

Mean­while, Lars Jen­sen, chief exe­cu­ti­ve and part­ner of Ves­puc­ci Mari­tim, told Capital.com that the latest sus­pen­si­ons are not surprising.

“It is a mat­ter of risk manage­ment. Whilst it is still per­fect­ly pos­si­ble to ship car­go to Rus­sia, the­re is signi­fi­cant uncer­tain­ty as to the deve­lo­p­ment of fur­ther sanc­tions. If sanc­tions sud­den­ly pre­vent ope­ra­ti­ons into Rus­sia this means that thousands of con­tai­ners in the sup­ply chain to Rus­sia will get stuck in key ports in Euro­pe and that will worsen con­ges­ti­on problems.

src: click

From today: (01. March 2022, 13:55:29 UTC) Is it a bad sign, that he says in a rhe­to­ri­cal figu­re, that they didnt know, that that was the pri­ce they had to pay for free­dom? He pre­faces that by say­ing that he is making tho­se remarks, spea­king free­ly (not rea­ding a speech).

A few hours ear­lier on CNN: click

As Ukrai­ni­an Pre­si­dent Volo­dym­yr Zelen­sky con­ti­nues to call for a no fly zone in Ukrai­ne, the White House said Mon­day after­noon that US Pre­si­dent Joe Biden remains firm in his com­mit­ment to keep US tro­ops out of the conflict.

“The Pre­si­dent has been very clear that he is not inten­ding to send US tro­ops to fight a war with Rus­sia. And I think what’s important to note here is that is essen­ti­al­ly what this would be a step toward, becau­se a no fly zone would requi­re imple­men­ta­ti­on,” White House press secreta­ry Jen Psa­ki said.

No poli­ti­cal or PR advi­sor pre­sent at the moment?

edit: Ach nein, ist es nicht - ich hab da wohl falsch gedacht.

Artist: Oli­ver Schopf
src: click

Part of that is what our ener­gy eco­sys­tem should be lin­ked to more per­ma­nent­ly now, that the­re is an ongo­ing war in the Ukrai­ne. Depen­ding on whe­re the access LNG is com­ing from that will enab­le euro­pes ener­gy tran­si­ti­on, mid term.

and brain­drain initiatives.

Fore­mo­st, they [“bet­ter” inter­na­tio­nal sanc­tions] would block the ruling eli­te while gran­ting ordi­na­ry Rus­si­ans expe­di­ted visas and even refu­gee sta­tus with the right to live and work in eco­no­mi­c­al­ly deve­lo­ped coun­tries. They would pro­vi­de sup­port for the relo­ca­ti­on of entre­pre­neurs and spe­cia­lists, enab­ling hund­reds of thousands of high­ly skil­led and edu­ca­ted Rus­si­ans to lea­ve and stop paying taxes to this government.

What if Ein­stein and other Ger­ma­ny phy­si­cists had been pre­ven­ted from lea­ving Ger­ma­ny? Which coun­try would have built the ato­mic bomb in 1945?

The same princip­le app­lies to capi­tal. Only about 100,000 fami­lies in Rus­sia have savings of more than $1 mil­li­on. More peop­le than that atten­ded ral­lies in sup­port of oppo­si­ti­on lea­der Ale­xei Naval­ny. The­se wealt­hy indi­vi­du­als are most­ly staunch sup­por­ters of peace and good-neighborly rela­ti­ons bet­ween sta­tes. After all, their hol­dings depend on unrestric­ted air tra­vel and free­dom to coope­ra­te across bor­ders. Now, the owners of the­se Rus­si­an bank accounts are trans­fer­ring their wealth abroad en mas­se and with­drawing cash in for­eign cur­ren­cy, ther­eby demons­tra­ting their fears and their desi­re to with­draw their capi­tal befo­re the Rus­si­an aut­ho­ri­ties gain con­trol over it. Under no cir­cum­s­tan­ces should the West restrict this capi­tal flow: other­wi­se, that $100 bil­li­on in assets would remain at the Kremlin’s disposal. 

Wes­tern coun­tries should faci­li­ta­te this capi­tal flight by tem­pora­ri­ly sus­pen­ding the prac­ti­ce of KYC (know your cli­ent). Of cour­se, ever­yo­ne trans­fer­ring funds would do so knowing that they would have to go through this pro­ce­du­re later and pro­ve that the money was acqui­red legally.

Oh, and they like this:

If the EU and NATO real­ly want to stop the aggres­sor and pro­tect them­sel­ves from con­ti­nued aggres­si­on, they can and should risk impo­sing signi­fi­cant restric­tions on deli­vering pay­ment for Rus­si­an oil and gas. Spe­ci­fi­cal­ly, the West could trans­fer pay­ments to spe­cial accounts from which Rus­sia could only draw to pay for a limi­ted ran­ge of impor­ted goods. It could also limit the purcha­se pri­ce for Rus­si­an oil and gas by intro­du­cing a high excise tax; this would signi­fi­cant­ly redu­ce the flow of petro­dol­lars to Rus­sia, even from coun­tries that have yet to join the sanctions.

src: click

edit: Thats from an opi­ni­on pie­ce, not edi­to­ri­al, but in times like these…

In einem bemer­kens­wer­ten Inter­view mit der Nach­rich­ten­agen­tur AP sag­te Kiews Bür­ger­meis­ter Vita­li Klitsch­ko heu­te, dass die Haupt­stadt von rus­si­schen Trup­pen umzin­gelt sei, und kei­ne Eva­ku­ie­run­gen mehr mög­lich seien.

src: click

“We are at the bor­der of a huma­ni­ta­ri­an cata­stro­phe,” he said. “Right now, we have electri­ci­ty, right now we have water and hea­ting in our houses. But the infra­st­ruc­tu­re is des­troy­ed to deli­ver the food and medication.”

Ori­gi­nal src: click

edit: Vor vier Minuten:

Schweiz will EU bei Russland-Sanktionen folgen
Der Schwei­zer Bun­des­prä­si­dent Igna­zio Cas­sis sagt, es sei sehr wahr­schein­lich, dass sein Land mor­gen der EU fol­gen wer­de, Russ­land zu sank­tio­nie­ren und rus­si­sche Ver­mö­gens­wer­te ein­zu­frie­ren. Die Schweiz ist unter ande­rem ein wich­ti­ges Zen­trum bei der Finan­zie­rung von Rohstoffgeschäften.

src: click

edit2:

Klitsch­ko wider­spricht sich selbst
Vor weni­gen Stun­den noch sag­te Kiews Bür­ger­meis­ter Vita­li Klitsch­ko, die Ukrai­ni­sche Haupt­stadt sei umzin­gelt von rus­si­schen Streit­kräf­ten, des­halb sei­en auch kei­ne Eva­ku­ie­run­gen möglich.

Er dürf­te sich ver­spro­chen haben, denn der Bild sagt er, Kiew sei nicht kom­plett ein­ge­kes­selt: “Die ukrai­ni­sche Armee kämpft hart in den Außen­be­zir­ken und die rus­si­sche Armee hat vie­le Verluste.”

src: click

OT bei bild:

„Kiew ist nicht kom­plett ein­ge­kes­selt! Die ukrai­ni­sche Armee kämpft hart in den Außen­be­zir­ken und die rus­si­sche Armee hat vie­le Ver­lus­te. Was die Flucht von Zivi­lis­ten angeht: Solan­ge es eine Aus­gangs­sper­re gibt, ist die­se nicht mög­lich, weil nie­mand nach drau­ßen kann.“

edit3: US Bot­schaft in der Ukrai­ne am spä­ten Sonntag:

US Embas­sy in Ukrai­ne urges Ame­ri­cans to lea­ve, warns of 30-hour wait at crow­ded bor­der crossings
From CNN’s Moham­med Taw­feeq in Lviv

The US Embas­sy in Ukrai­ne said late Sunday that the secu­ri­ty situa­ti­on throughout the coun­try “con­ti­nues to be unpre­dic­ta­ble, with acti­ve figh­t­ing insi­de many cities and other locations.”

“Con­di­ti­ons may dete­rio­ra­te as mili­ta­ry attacks by Rus­sia con­ti­nue in various parts of the coun­try without any warning,” it added in a state­ment, urging Ame­ri­cans the­re to “depart now using pri­va­te­ly avail­ab­le trans­por­ta­ti­on opti­ons if it is safe to do so.”

src: click

edit4: 28.02. 9:00:

In Kiew und ande­ren Städ­ten soll­ten zudem Ver­tei­lungs­punk­te für Lebens­mit­tel ein­ge­rich­tet wer­den, teil­te das ukrai­ni­sche Minis­te­ri­um für Infra­struk­tur mit. Dem­nach wür­den auch alle Ausgangs- und Zufahrts­stra­ßen von der Ukrai­ne kon­trol­liert. Das ließ sich nicht unab­hän­gig prü­fen. Es wer­de außer­dem an der Ein­rich­tung soge­nann­ter grü­ner Kor­ri­do­re gear­bei­tet, die nach Anga­ben des Minis­te­ri­ums den Waren­ver­kehr sicher­stel­len sollen.

src: click

Man kon­trol­lie­re alle Zufahrts­stra­ßen, habe aber kei­ne grü­nen Kor­ri­do­re für den Warenverkehr.

edit5: Die Rus­sen fin­den grad auch, dass sich die Men­schen auf den Weg machen soll­ten. Am Bes­ten über die Auto­bahn Kiew-Wassilkow.

Rus­si­sches Ver­tei­di­gungs­mi­nis­te­ri­um for­dert Zivi­lis­ten zum Ver­las­sen von Kiew auf
Das rus­si­sche Ver­tei­di­gungs­mi­nis­te­ri­um rich­te­te unter­des­sen einen “Appell” an die Men­schen in Kiew, die rus­si­sche Nach­rich­ten­agen­tur RIA mel­det. Aktu­ell sei die Situa­ti­on so, dass ukrai­ni­sche Zivi­lis­tin­nen und Zivi­lis­ten Kiew unge­hin­dert ver­las­sen könn­ten. Mög­lich sei dies ent­lang der Auto­bahn Kiew-Wassilkow. “Die­se Rich­tung ist offen und sicher”, hieß es aus dem Ministerium.

src: click

The­re are things in this world…

Oh well - if it helps…

Oh but don’t fret, the ger­man Han­dels­blatt has an inter­view as well! - click

edit: Kas­parow on 02.03.2022 on Twitter:

PS To all offi­cials and media: STOP CALLING PUTIN ‘PRESIDENT’! He’s a dic­ta­tor. Words have power. He does not deser­ve a demo­cra­tic tit­le. Fuck your style gui­de. “Rus­si­an dic­ta­tor Vla­di­mir Putin”.

src: click

Laut Telegram-Account des ukrai­ni­schen Prä­si­di­al­amts hät­ten Wolo­dym­ir Selen­skyj und Alex­an­der Luka­schen­ko ver­ein­bart, dass sich die ukrai­ni­sche Dele­ga­ti­on mit der rus­si­schen Dele­ga­ti­on ohne Vor­be­din­gun­gen an der ukrainisch-belarussischen Gren­ze in der Nähe des Flus­ses Pryp­jat tref­fen soll.

Luka­schen­ko habe dem­nach die Ver­ant­wor­tung dafür über­nom­men, dass alle auf bela­rus­si­schem Ter­ri­to­ri­um sta­tio­nier­ten Flug­zeu­ge, Hub­schrau­ber und Rake­ten wäh­rend der Rei­se, der Gesprä­che und der Rück­kehr der ukrai­ni­schen Dele­ga­ti­on am Boden bleiben.

Zugleich wies ein Bera­ter Selen­sky­js Berich­te über geplan­te Gesprä­che zwi­schen Russ­land und der Ukrai­ne im Nach­bar­land Bela­rus zurück.

src: click

Frie­dens­ge­sprä­che an der Gren­ze “in der Nähe des Flus­ses Pryp­jat”? Naja, wenigs­tens gibt es Gesprä­che. Allegedly.

edit: Oh sehr schlau. Anstatt die Wahr­schein­lich­keit bezüg­lich eines Ver­hand­lungs­er­fol­ges durch die Städ­te oder Stät­ten die gewählt wer­den zu kom­mu­ni­zie­ren, haut mans noch mal im Vor­feld via Tele­gram her­aus. Naja, wenns die Ver­hand­lungs­po­si­ti­on stärkt.

Ukrai­nes Prä­si­dent Wolo­dym­yr Selen­skyj hat sich auf sei­nem Telegram-Account zu den anste­hen­den Gesprä­chen mit Russ­land geäußert.

[…]

Die Gesprä­che sol­len am Grenz­fluss Prip­jat nahe des Grenz­über­gangs Alex­an­d­row­ka (Bela­rus) und Wiltscha (Ukrai­ne) statt­fin­den. Selen­skyj sagt, er mache sich wenig Hoff­nun­gen über die Gesprä­che, aber einen Ver­such sei es wert. Er wol­le auch noch so klei­ne Chan­cen nut­zen, den Krieg zu stop­pen, sag­te er sinngemäß.

[Selen­skyj] tausch­te sich mit dem bela­rus­si­schen Macht­ha­ber Alex­an­der Luka­schen­ko aus und sprach von einem „sehr gehalt­vol­len“ Gespräch. Selen­skyj for­der­te, dass kei­ne Trup­pen über Bela­rus in die Ukrai­ne kom­men, Luka­schen­ko hät­te ihm zuge­si­chert, dass dies nicht pas­sie­ren wer­de. Dabei dürf­te es sich aber ledig­lich um eine Zusa­ge für den Zeit­raum der Gesprä­che an der ukrainisch-belarussischen Gren­ze han­deln. Denn am spä­te­ren Nach­mit­tag, um 17 Uhr Orts­zeit, wur­den Kurz­stre­cken­ra­ke­ten des Typs Iskan­der von bela­rus­si­schem Gebiet abge­feu­ert. Die­se hät­ten den Flug­ha­fen in Schy­to­myr im Nor­den der Ukrai­ne getrof­fen, wie ein Spre­cher des ukrai­ni­schen Innen­mi­nis­ters bestätigte.

src: click

edit: Mehr Erwar­tungs­ma­nage­ment vor dem Treffen:

A seni­or U.S. intel­li­gence offi­cial says Bela­rus is expec­ted to send tro­ops into Ukrai­ne as soon as Mon­day to fight along­side Rus­si­an for­ces that inva­ded Ukrai­ne last week.

Bela­rus has been pro­vi­ding sup­port for Russia’s war effort, but so far has not taken a direct part in the conflict.

The Ame­ri­can offi­cial has direct know­ledge of cur­rent U.S. intel­li­gence assess­ments and says the decisi­on by Bela­rus’ lea­der on whe­ther to bring Bela­rus fur­ther into the war depends on talks bet­ween Rus­sia and Ukrai­ne hap­pe­ning in the com­ing days. The offi­cial spo­ke anony­mous­ly to dis­cuss the sen­si­ti­ve information.

src: click
AP am 28.02. um 06:00

Ukrai­ne for­dert sofor­ti­gen Waf­fen­still­stand und rus­si­schen Abzug
Die ukrai­ni­sche Dele­ga­ti­on ist offen­bar an der ukrainisch-belorussischen Gren­ze ange­kom­men, um dort mit der rus­si­schen Dele­ga­ti­on zu ver­han­deln. Die Gesprä­che sol­len daher in Kür­ze begin­nen. Das teil­te das ukrai­ni­sche Prä­si­di­al­amt Mon­tag­vor­mit­tag mit. Ange­strebt wer­den dabei von der Ukrai­ne ein sofor­ti­ger Waf­fen­still­stand und der Abzug aller rus­si­schen Truppen. 

src: click
Stan­dard am 28.02. um 10:00 (Eben­falls noch vor den Ver­hand­lun­gen, die um 12:00 MEZ begin­nen sollen.)

A video of an accor­di­on folk dance, and some cap­tures of the video­ga­me Arma 3. A video from an air­show. Oh and an embarr­as­sing mista­ke by bild.de. Oh, and an explo­si­on video. Be care­ful what you share!

No serious­ly, be care­ful what you share.

edit:

Wäh­rend in der Ukrai­ne hef­ti­ge Kämp­fe mit unge­wis­sem Aus­gang toben, hat sich das Blatt im vir­tu­el­len Raum bereits gewen­det. Die gefürch­te­ten Cyber­trup­pen Russ­lands spie­len in die­sem Krieg bis jetzt kei­ne Rol­le, in den sozia­len Netz­wer­ken sind die rus­si­schen Troll-Armeen samt ihren rechts­ex­tre­men Alli­ier­ten aus dem Wes­ten rest­los in der Defensive.

src: click (Autor ist Moechel)

edit:

Rus­sia has appar­ent­ly ren­de­red Face­book lar­ge­ly unus­able across lea­ding Rus­si­an telecom­mu­ni­ca­ti­ons pro­vi­ders amid rising fric­tion bet­ween Moscow and the social media platform.

The London-based inter­net moni­tor Net­Blocks reports that Facebook’s net­work of content-distribution ser­vers in Rus­sia was so bad­ly restric­ted Sunday that “con­tent no lon­ger loads, or loads extre­me­ly slow­ly making the plat­forms unusable.”

Rus­si­an telecoms regu­la­tor Rosk­om­nadzor on Fri­day announ­ced plans to “par­ti­al­ly restrict” access to Facebook.

[…]

The Twit­ter and Face­book restric­tions can be cir­cum­ven­ted insi­de Rus­sia using VPN software

src: click

edit: 28.02.:

Meta has blo­cked an influ­ence ope­ra­ti­on with ties to a rus­si­an net­work in the Don­bas regi­on, that was sprea­ding the ide­as, that the west was betray­ing Ukrai­ne, and Ukrai­ne being a fai­led sta­te. The net­work reached appro­xi­mate­ly 4500 followers.

Addi­tio­nal­ly Meta is warning, that some accounts might be com­pro­mi­sed, with no fur­ther details on num­bers or impact.

“We do have a sen­se that Ghost­wri­ters did suc­cess­ful­ly com­pro­mi­se some accounts on the Face­book plat­form,” Glei­cher said”

src: click

edit: Mimi­ka­ma arbei­tet in die­sen Tagen laut dem Stan­dard auf Hoch­tou­ren, hier der direct link auf ihre Fak­ten­check Kategorie.

dass die Ukrai­ne sich zum Ver­zicht auf Atom­waf­fen durch­ge­run­gen hat, und die Inva­si­on ihr Geschenk war… (sie­he: click)

In 1993, Inter­na­tio­nal rela­ti­ons theo­rist and Uni­ver­si­ty of Chi­ca­go pro­fes­sor John Mear­s­hei­mer publis­hed an arti­cle inclu­ding his pre­dic­tion that a Ukrai­ne without any nuclear deter­rent was likely to be sub­jec­ted to aggres­si­on by Rus­sia, but this was very much a mino­ri­ty view at the time.[8]

A stu­dy publis­hed in 2016 in the jour­nal World Affairs argued that, in the opi­ni­on of the aut­hors, the denu­clea­riz­a­ti­on of Ukrai­ne was not a “stu­pid mista­ke”, and that it is unclear that Ukrai­ne would be bet­ter off as a nuclear sta­te.[9] The stu­dy argued that the push for Ukrai­ni­an inde­pen­dence was with a view to make it a nonnu­clear sta­te.[9] Accord­ing to the aut­hors, the United Sta­tes would also not have made Ukrai­ne an excep­ti­on when it came to the denu­clea­riz­a­ti­on of other post-Soviet sta­tes such as Bela­rus and Kazakh­stan.[9] The deter­rent value of the nuclear wea­pons in Ukrai­ne was also ques­tion­ab­le, as Ukrai­ne would have had to spend 12 to 18 mon­ths to estab­lish full ope­ra­tio­nal con­trol over the nuclear arse­nal left by the Rus­si­ans.[9] The ICBMs also had a ran­ge of 5,000–10,000 km (initi­al­ly tar­ge­ting the United Sta­tes), which meant that they could only have been re-targeted to hit Russia’s far east.[9] The air-launched crui­se mis­si­les (ALCMs) left by the Rus­si­ans had been dis­ab­led by the Rus­si­ans during the col­lap­se of the Soviet Uni­on, but even if they had been recon­fi­gu­red and made to work by the Ukrai­ni­ans, it is unli­kely that they would have had a deter­rent effect.[9] Had Ukrai­ne deci­ded to estab­lish full ope­ra­tio­nal con­trol of the nuclear wea­pons, it would have faced sanc­tions by the West and perhaps even a with­dra­wal of diplo­ma­tic reco­gni­ti­on by the United Sta­tes and other NATO allies.[9] Ukrai­ne would also likely have faced reta­lia­to­ry action by Rus­sia.[9] Ukrai­ne would also have strug­gled with repla­cing the nuclear wea­pons once their ser­vice life expi­red, as Ukrai­ne did not have a nuclear wea­pons pro­gram.[9] In exchan­ge for giving up its nuclear wea­pons, Ukrai­ne recei­ved finan­cial com­pen­sa­ti­on, as well as the secu­ri­ty assuran­ces of the Buda­pest Memo­ran­dum.[9]

src: click

Das zu wis­sen kann man von Fried­rich Merz natür­lich nicht erwarten.

Das Buda­pes­ter Memo­ran­dum wur­de jetzt gebrochen.