Authored by Mike Whitney,

On February 16, 2022, a full week earlier than Putin despatched fight troops into Ukraine, the Ukrainian Military started the heavy bombardment of the world (in east Ukraine) occupied by primarily ethnic Russians. 

Officers from the Observer Mission of the Group for Safety and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) had been situated within the neighborhood on the time and stored a report of the shelling because it befell. What the OSCE found was that the bombardment dramatically intensified because the week went on till it reached a peak on February 19, when a complete of two,026 artillery strikes had been recorded. Bear in mind, the Ukrainian Military was, in actual fact, shelling civilian areas alongside the Line of Contact that had been occupied by different Ukrainians.

We need to emphasize that the officers from the OSCE had been working of their skilled capability gathering first-hand proof of shelling within the space. What their information exhibits is that Ukrainian Forces had been bombing and killing their very own folks. This has all been documented and has not been challenged.

So, the query we should all ask ourselves is that this: Is the bombardment and slaughter of 1’s personal folks an ‘act of warfare’?

We expect it’s. And if we’re proper, then we should logically assume that the warfare started earlier than the Russian invasion (which was launched a full week later) We should additionally assume that Russia’s alleged “unprovoked aggression” was not unprovoked in any respect however was the suitable humanitarian response to the deliberate killing of civilians. To be able to argue that the Russian invasion was ‘not provoked’, we must say that firing over 4,000 artillery shells into cities and neighborhoods the place girls and youngsters reside, just isn’t a provocation? Who will defend that standpoint?

Nobody, as a result of it’s absurd. The killing of civilians within the Donbas was a transparent provocation, a provocation that was geared toward goading Russia right into a warfare. And –as we mentioned earlier– the OSCE had displays on the bottom who supplied full documentation of the shelling because it befell, which is as near ironclad, eyewitness testimony as you’re going to get.

This, in fact, is a serious break with the “official narrative” which identifies Russia because the perpetrator of hostilities. However, as we’ve proven, that merely isn’t the case. The official narrative is unsuitable. Even so, it may not shock you to know that many of the mainstream media fully omitted any protection of the OSCE’s fact-finding actions in east Ukraine. The one exception to was Reuters that revealed a intentionally opaque account revealed on February 18 titled “Russia voices alarm over sharp enhance of Donbass shelling”. Right here’s an excerpt:

Russian Overseas Minister Sergei Lavrov voiced alarm on Friday over a pointy enhance in shelling in japanese Ukraine and accused the OSCE particular monitoring mission of glossing over what he mentioned had been Ukrainian violations of the peace course of….

Washington and its allies have raised fears that the upsurge in violence within the Donbass may type a part of a Russian pretext to invade Ukraine. Tensions are already excessive over a Russian navy buildup to the north, east and south of Ukraine.

“We’re very involved by the experiences of latest days – yesterday and the day earlier than there was a pointy enhance in shelling utilizing weapons which can be prohibited beneath the Minsk agreements,” Lavrov mentioned, referring to peace accords geared toward ending the battle. “To date we’re seeing the particular monitoring mission is doing its greatest to easy over all questions that time to the blame of Ukraine’s armed forces,” he informed a information convention.

Ukraine’s navy on Friday denied violating the Minsk peace course of and accused Moscow of waging an data warfare to say that Kyiv was shelling civilians, allegations it mentioned had been lies and designed to impress it.” (Russia voices alarm over sharp enhance of Donbass shelling, Reuters)

Discover the intelligent method that Reuters frames its protection in order that the claims of the Ukrainian navy are given as a lot credibility because the claims of the Russian Overseas Minister. What Reuters fails to level out is that the OSCE’s report verifies Lavrov’s model of occasions whereas disproving the claims of the Ukrainians. It’s the job of a journalist to make the excellence between truth and fiction however, as soon as once more, we see how agenda-driven information just isn’t meant to tell however to mislead.

Quote: Larry C. Johnson, A Son of a New Revolution

The purpose we are attempting to make is straightforward: The warfare in Ukraine was not launched by a tyrannical Russian chief (Putin) bent on rebuilding the Soviet Empire. That narrative is a fraud that was cobbled collectively by neocon spin-meisters attempting to construct public assist for a warfare with Russia. The information I’m presenting right here may be recognized on a map the place the precise explosions befell and had been then recorded by officers whose job was to satisfy that very job. Are you able to see the distinction between the 2? In a single case, the storyline rests on hypothesis, conjecture and psychobabble; whereas within the different, the storyline is linked to precise occasions that befell on the bottom and had been catalogued by skilled professionals within the subject. Wherein model of occasions do you will have extra confidence?

Backside line: Russia didn’t begin the warfare in Ukraine. That could be a faux narrative. The duty lies with the Ukrainian Military and their leaders in Kiev.

And right here’s one thing else that’s sometimes excluded within the media’s selective protection. Earlier than Putin despatched his tanks throughout the border into Ukraine, he invoked United Nations Article 51 which gives a authorized justification for navy intervention. In fact, the US has accomplished this quite a few occasions to offer a fig leaf of legitimacy to its quite a few navy interventions. However, on this case, you’ll be able to see the place the so-called Duty To Defend (R2P) may really be justified, in spite of everything, by most estimates, the Ukrainian military has killed over 14,000 ethnic Russians because the US-backed coup 8 years in the past. If ever there was a state of affairs through which a defensive navy operation might be justified, this was it. However that also doesn’t totally clarify why Putin invoked UN Article 51. For that, we flip to former weapons inspector Scott Ritter, who defined it like this:

Russian President Vladimir Putin, citing Article 51 as his authority, ordered what he known as a ‘particular navy operation’….
beneath Article 51, there may be little doubt as to the legitimacy of Russia’s competition that the Russian-speaking inhabitants of the Donbass had been subjected to a brutal eight-year-long bombardment that had killed hundreds of individuals.… Furthermore, Russia claims to have documentary proof that the Ukrainian Military was getting ready for a large navy incursion into the Donbass which was pre-empted by the Russian-led ‘particular navy operation.’ [OSCE figures show an increase of government shelling of the area in the days before Russia moved in.]

..The underside line is that Russia has set forth a cognizable declare beneath the doctrine of anticipatory collective self-defense, devised initially by the US and NATO, because it applies to Article 51 which is based on truth, not fiction.

Whereas it is likely to be in vogue for folks, organizations, and governments within the West to embrace the knee-jerk conclusion that Russia’s navy intervention constitutes a wanton violation of the United Nations Constitution and, as such, constitutes an unlawful warfare of aggression, the uncomfortable fact is that, of all of the claims made relating to the legality of pre-emption beneath Article 51 of the United Nations Constitution, Russia’s justification for invading Ukraine is on strong authorized floor. (“Russia, Ukraine & the Regulation of Conflict: Crime of Aggression”, Consortium Information)

Right here’s a bit extra background from an article by international coverage analyst Danial Kovalik:

One should start this dialogue by accepting the truth that there was already a warfare taking place in Ukraine for the eight years previous the Russian navy incursion in February 2022. And, this warfare by the federal government in Kiev… claimed the lives of round 14,000 folks, lots of them youngsters, and displaced round 1.5 million extra … The federal government in Kiev, and particularly its neo-Nazi battalions, carried out assaults in opposition to these peoples … exactly due to their ethnicity. ..

Whereas the UN Constitution prohibits unilateral acts of warfare, it additionally gives, in Article 51, that ‘nothing within the current Constitution shall impair the inherent proper of particular person or collective self-defense… ‘ And this proper of self-defense has been interpreted to allow international locations to reply, not solely to precise armed assaults, but in addition to the specter of imminent assault.

In gentle of the above, it’s my evaluation.. that Russia had a proper to behave in its personal self-defense by intervening in Ukraine, which had turn out to be a proxy of the US and NATO for an assault – not solely on Russian ethnics inside Ukraine – but in addition upon Russia itself. (“Why Russia’s intervention in Ukraine is authorized beneath worldwide legislation”, RT)

So, has anybody within the western media reported on the truth that Putin invoked UN Article 51 earlier than he launched the Particular Navy Operation?

No, they haven’t, as a result of to take action, can be an admission that Putin’s navy operation complies with worldwide legislation. As a substitute, the media continues to unfold the fiction that ‘Hitler-Putin is attempting to rebuild the Soviet empire’, a declare for which there’s not a scintilla of proof. Bear in mind, Putin’s operation doesn’t contain the toppling of a international authorities to put in a Moscow-backed stooge, or the arming and coaching a international navy that can be used as proxies to combat a geopolitical rival, or the stuffing a rustic with state-of-the-art weaponry to realize his personal slim strategic goals, or perpetrating terrorist acts of commercial sabotage (Nord-Stream 2) to forestall the financial integration of Asia and Europe. No, Putin hasn’t engaged in any of this stuff. However Washington definitely has, as a result of Washington isn’t constrained by worldwide legislation. In Washington’s eyes, worldwide legislation is merely an inconvenience that’s dismissively shrugged off at any time when unilateral motion is required. However Putin just isn’t almost as cavalier about such issues, in actual fact, he has a protracted historical past of enjoying by the foundations as a result of he believes the foundations assist to strengthen everybody’s safety. And, he’s proper; they do.

And that’s why he invoked Article 51 earlier than he despatched the troops to assist the folks within the Donbas. He felt he had an ethical obligation to lend them his help however needed his actions to adjust to worldwide legislation. We expect he achieved each.

US imperial planner George Kennan, an architect of the primary chilly warfare, wrote in 1948:

“we now have about 50% of the world’s wealth however solely 6.3% of its inhabitants”

“Our actual job” is “to keep up this place of disparity”

US international coverage in a nutshellhttps://t.co/H0WrFBDdTM pic.twitter.com/w1iJMCvX3e

— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) October 28, 2022

Right here’s one thing else you’ll by no means see within the western media. You’ll by no means see the precise textual content of Putin’s safety calls for that had been made a full two months earlier than the warfare broke out. And, the explanation you received’t see them, is as a result of his calls for had been respectable, affordable and mandatory. All Putin needed was primary assurances that NATO was not planning to place its bases, armies and missile websites on Russia’s border. In different phrases, he was doing the identical factor that each one accountable leaders do to defend the security and safety of their very own folks.

Listed below are a number of crucial excerpts from the textual content of Putin’s proposal to the US and NATO:

Article 1

The Events shall cooperate on the idea of ideas of indivisible, equal and undiminished safety and to those ends:

shall not undertake actions nor take part in or assist actions that have an effect on the safety of the opposite Social gathering;
shall not implement safety measures adopted by every Social gathering individually or within the framework of a global group, navy alliance or coalition that might undermine core safety pursuits of the opposite Social gathering.

Article 3

The Events shall not use the territories of different States with a view to getting ready or finishing up an armed assault in opposition to the opposite Social gathering or different actions affecting core safety pursuits of the opposite Social gathering.

Article 4

The US of America shall undertake to forestall additional eastward enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Group and deny accession to the Alliance to the States of the previous Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

The US of America shall not set up navy bases within the territory of the States of the previous Union of Soviet Socialist Republics that aren’t members of the North Atlantic Treaty Group, use their infrastructure for any navy actions or develop bilateral navy cooperation with them.

Article 5

The Events shall chorus from deploying their armed forces and armaments, together with within the framework of worldwide organizations, navy alliances or coalitions, within the areas the place such deployment might be perceived by the opposite Social gathering as a menace to its nationwide safety, except such deployment throughout the nationwide territories of the Events.

The Events shall chorus from flying heavy bombers geared up for nuclear or non-nuclear armaments or deploying floor warships of any kind, together with within the framework of worldwide organizations, navy alliances or coalitions, within the areas outdoors nationwide airspace and nationwide territorial waters respectively, from the place they will assault targets within the territory of the opposite Social gathering.

The Events shall preserve dialogue and cooperate to enhance mechanisms to forestall harmful navy actions on and over the excessive seas, together with agreeing on the utmost method distance between warships and plane.

Article 6

The Events shall undertake to not deploy ground-launched intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles outdoors their nationwide territories, in addition to within the areas of their nationwide territories, from which such weapons can assault targets within the nationwide territory of the opposite Social gathering.

Article 7

The Events shall chorus from deploying nuclear weapons outdoors their nationwide territories and return such weapons already deployed outdoors their nationwide territories on the time of the entry into power of the Treaty to their nationwide territories. The Events shall remove all present infrastructure for deployment of nuclear weapons outdoors their nationwide territories.

The Events shall not practice navy and civilian personnel from non-nuclear international locations to make use of nuclear weapons. The Events shall not conduct workouts or coaching for general-purpose forces, that embody eventualities involving the usage of nuclear weapons.” (“To Make Sense of Conflict”, Israel Shamir, Unz Overview)

It doesn’t take a genius to determine what Putin was fearful about. He was fearful about NATO enlargement and, particularly, the emergence of a hostile navy alliance backed by Washington-groomed Nazis occupying territory on his western flank. Was that unreasonable of him? Ought to he have embraced these US-backed Russophobes and allowed them to put their missiles on his border? Would which have been the prudent factor to do?

So, what can we deduce from Putin’s listing of calls for?

First, we will deduce that he’s not attempting to reconstruct the Soviet empire because the MSM relentlessly insists. The listing focuses completely on security-related calls for, nothing else.

Second, it proves that the warfare may have simply been prevented had Zelensky merely maintained the established order and formally introduced that Ukraine would stay impartial. In reality, Zelensky really agreed to neutrality in negotiations with Moscow in March, however Washington prevented the Ukrainian president from going by with the deal which signifies that the Biden administration is basically chargeable for the continuing battle. (RT revealed an article stating clearly that an settlement had been reached between Russia and Ukraine in March however the deal was deliberately scuttled by the US and UK. Washington needed a warfare.)

Third, it exhibits that Putin is an inexpensive chief whose calls for ought to have been eagerly accepted. Was it unreasonable of Putin to ask that “The Events shall chorus from deploying their armed forces and… navy alliances.. within the areas the place such deployment might be perceived by the opposite Social gathering as a menace to its nationwide safety”? Was it unreasonable for him the ask that “The Events shall remove all present infrastructure for deployment of nuclear weapons outdoors their nationwide territories”?

The place precisely are the “unreasonable calls for” that Putin supposedly made?

There aren’t any. Putin made no calls for that the US wouldn’t have made if ‘the shoe was on the opposite foot.’

Fourth, it proves that the warfare just isn’t a wrestle for Ukrainian liberation or democracy. That’s hogwash. It’s a warfare that’s geared toward “weakening” Russia and finally eradicating Putin from energy. These are the overriding objectives. What which means is that Ukrainian troopers aren’t dying for his or her nation, they’re dying for an elitist dream to broaden NATO, crush Russia, encircle China, and prolong US hegemony for an additional century. Ukraine is merely the battlefield on which the Nice Energy wrestle is being fought.

There are quantity factors we are attempting to make on this article:

1) Who began the warfare?
Reply– Ukraine began the warfare

2) Was the Russian invasion a violation of worldwide legislation?
Reply– No, the Russian invasion ought to be accepted beneath United Nations Article 51

3) May the warfare have been prevented if Ukraine declared neutrality and met Putin’s affordable calls for?
Reply– Sure, the warfare may have been prevented

4) The final level offers with the Minsk Treaty and the way the dishonesty of western leaders goes to impact the ultimate settlement in Ukraine. I’m satisfied that neither Washington nor the NATO allies have any thought of how severely worldwide relations have been decimated by the Minsk betrayal. In a world the place legally binding agreements may be breezily discarded within the title of political expediency, the one method to settle disputes is thru brute power. Did anybody in Germany, France or Washington take into consideration this earlier than they acted? (However, first, some background on Minsk.)

The goal of the Minsk settlement was to finish the preventing between the Ukrainian military and ethnic Russians within the Donbas area of Ukraine. It was the duty of the 4 individuals within the treaty– Germany, France, Russia and Ukraine– to make sure that either side adopted the phrases of the deal. However in December, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel mentioned in an interview with a German journal, that there was by no means any intention of implementing the deal, as an alternative, the plan was to make use of the time to make Ukraine stronger so as to put together for a warfare with Russia. So, clearly, from the very starting, the US meant to impress a warfare with Russia.

On September 5, 2014, Germany, France, Ukraine and Russia all signed Minsk, however the treaty failed and the preventing resumed. On February 12, 2015, Minsk 2 was signed, however that failed, as properly. Please, watch this quick section on You Tube by Amit Sengupta who provides a quick rundown of Minsk and its implications: (I transcribed the piece myself and any errors are mine.)

(11:40 minute) “In 2015, Germany and France had been imagined to play a impartial position.They had been imagined to make Ukraine and Russia observe the foundations. However they didn’t do this, and the explanation they didn’t do that’s what Angela Merkel revealed in her interview on December 7. Merkel mentioned, “The 2014 Minsk settlement was an try to present time to Ukraine. It additionally gave time to turn out to be stronger as may be seen right this moment. The Ukraine of 2014 and 2015 just isn’t the trendy Ukraine.” 

Mainly, all three companions of the Minsk Settlement lied and betrayed Russia. Even Putin mentioned, “At some point Russia should attain an settlement with Ukraine, however Germany and France betrayed Russia, and now they’re serving to Ukraine with weapons.”… It’s a disgrace that western political leaders have interaction in negotiations that they don’t intend to honor or implement…(Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has admitted the identical as Merkel and Hollande)….Now even Putin has acknowledged that it was a mistake to comply with the Minsk Accords. 

He even mentioned that the Donbas downside ought to have been resolved by force-of-arms on the time. (2015) Russia waited 8 years to acknowledge Donbas’s independence, after which launched a full-scale assault this 12 months. However then Putin was beneath the impression that the Minsk Accords–assured by Germany and France and endorsed unanimously by the UN Safety Council together with the US– would resolve the disaster and would give the Donbas autonomy whereas remaining a part of Ukraine. Germany and France had been supposed to verify the Minsk accords had been applied from 2015 to 2022. The collective west all the time knew that warfare was the one answer. They by no means needed peace, they simply performed alongside within the title of Minsk settlement. So, you’ll be able to see, it’s a diplomatic “win” for the west……

France and Germany appeased Russia with the Minsk settlement and gave false hopes of a peaceable settlement. However, in actuality, they had been shopping for time for Ukraine to construct its navy. There was by no means a diplomatic answer; the collective west –which incorporates the US, NATO, the European Union and the G-7– fooled Russia into believing there was a diplomatic answer to the Donbas battle (however) as an alternative, they had been getting ready Ukraine for a full-fledged warfare in opposition to Russia. 

So, both method, this warfare was meant to occur. There was by no means a diplomatic answer…. That is what Angela Merkel needed to convey: “The Chilly Conflict by no means ended”. She was the German Chancellor when the coup befell in Ukraine in 2014 and the Minsk Accords had been signed. Subsequently her contribution to this duplicitous sport together with Germany, France, Ukraine and US– has led to this warfare. And he or she very properly is aware of it. However, both method, it’s not going to finish properly for Germany or France whose economies have been badly damage. Ukraine has been fully destroyed. It has turn out to be the Afghanistan of Europe. It’s the western political leaders which can be responsible of the homicide of Ukraine.

Because it has been since 2014, the Ukrainian authorities has been launching vicious navy assaults in opposition to Russian-speaking Ukrainian civilians within the Donbas area. 1000’s of Russian talking civilians have been killed. Russia ought to have taken again the territory in 2014 together with Crimea. However, then, Russia fell into the lure of the western international locations’ Minsk Settlement. … It’s not Russia that began this warfare, it’s the US that began this warfare. Ukraine is only a pawn that’s supported by the US and the opposite european governments. And, it’s a pity that the Ukrainian authorities serves the pursuits of the US and never the Ukrainian folks.” (“Angela Merkel’s revelation about Minsk Agreements | Russia Ukraine warfare“, Amit Sengupta, You Tube)

There’s no method to overstate the significance of the Minsk betrayal or the affect it’s going to have on the ultimate settlement in Ukraine. When belief is misplaced, nations can solely guarantee their safety by brute power. What which means is that Russia should broaden its perimeter so far as is critical to make sure that it can stay past the enemy’s vary of fireplace. (Putin, Lavrov and Medvedev have already indicated that they plan to do exactly that.) Second, the brand new perimeter should be completely fortified with fight troops and deadly weaponry which can be stored on hairtrigger alert. When treaties turn out to be automobiles for political opportunism, then nations should settle for a everlasting state of warfare. That is the world that Merkel, Hollande, Poroshenko and the US created by opting to make use of ‘the cornerstone of worldwide relations’ (Treaties) to advance their very own slim warmongering goals.

We simply surprise if anybody in Washington realizes whet the fu** they’ve accomplished?