The Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States as well as the High Representative of the European Union have jointly condemnded Russia.
The joint statement reads as follows:
“We, the G7 foreign ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America and the High Representative of the European Union are deeply concerned by the large ongoing build-up of Russian military forces on Ukraine’s borders and in illegally-annexed Crimea.
These large-scale troop movements, without prior notification, represent threatening and destabilising activities. We call on Russia to cease its provocations and to immediately de-escalate tensions in line with its international obligations. In particular, we call on Russia to uphold the OSCE principles and commitments that it has signed up to on transparency of military movements and to respond to the procedure established under Chapter III of the Vienna Document.
Recalling our last statement of 18 March, we reaffirm our unwavering support for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders. We support Ukraine’s posture of restraint.
We underline our strong appreciation and continued support for France’s and Germany’s efforts through the Normandy Process to secure the full implementation of the Minsk agreements, which is the only way forward for a lasting political solution to the conflict. We call on all sides to engage constructively in the Trilateral Contact Group on the OSCE’s proposals to confirm and consolidate the ceasefire.”
The Russians and separatist’s don’t seem to like the OSCE.
Blocking their path to 14 investigations and shooting down UAVs and using Electronic Warfare against the UAVs conducting research
More skirmishes today resulting in more Ukrainian deaths
I think political attempts are running out of time
Russia continues to bully and intimidate its neighbour countries. Poland 1939 and 1945, Estonia 1945, Latvia 1945, Lithuania 1945, Germany 1945, Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968.
Why would anything change?
Then those countries better pull their fingers out and start doing something to defend themselves. If they are expecting someone else to defend them they will be disappointed.
It’s all well and good in one of the 2 most powerful nations on earth sitting there and saying the better do something to defend themselves. Arms require scale to defeat/repel a nation with a military the size of Russia’s conventionally. Their economy doesn’t support it and they don’t have terrain to help repel like the Finns had. The eastern bloc have done the best thing: join an alliance and the likes of Poland and Estonia are spending big in their terms on arms. Ukraine, well….
Dan’s agenda is the same as was tRUMp’s, that is to breakup NATO! And the same Master in the Kremlin!
Yeah, i didn’t consider him being Putin’s man
They are, Poland is rearming and improving tech and tactics, the Baltic states are doing the same but with smaller numbers, as is Hungary. Germany is, well Germany. Do make an effort to research prior to posting, it does help. Cheers.
Apologies reply was to dan the not so subject matter aware man.
“Germany is Germany”
I think that’s the biggest stick in the craw right now. And I don’t have that much confidence in France or Italy either.
At least France and Italy actually operate functional militaries, and ironically Italy has ended up being the most reliable defence industrial partner we have
But we don’t have the stones to do anything else. haha
Well done G7 for getting the retaliation in first. However, as others have pointed out, without NATO directly intervening there is little we can do should Putin throw the dice and invade. But that isn’t the end of it. We can crippling sanctions on the already struggling Russian economy and, should it become necessary, sponsor an insurgency into the Ukraine from NATO territory which would make S Vietnam look like a rehearsal.
Don’t think sanctions worry Putin Rob for me he puts want he wants first .Not is people or is economy ,just enjoys playing top dog.
The Ukrainian army is large and capable, it just needs technical support and air power support to defend Ukraine from Russia.
Yes we should provide air support to Ukraine, to help it fight Russia.
Interpretation of paragraph three is all.
You know, if we scaled properly up we wouldn’t need to fear Russia. Their tradecraft is laughable and their fighting blokes are like strange dorks you’d bully in school.
But. On the flip side, how do you expect the Russians to respond when you continue to test putins manhood? He’s going to try and flex you to save face.
Food for thought.
No fear, Reaper. China – mm, yes for now.
If Vlad invades, I trust NATO/the West has a plan for continuing to supply weapons to the Ukraine – to drag Russia into a long war/guerrilla campaign. Russian casualties will quickly mount. No need for NATO to get formally engaged.
Lets see how well the Russian economy does with more sanctions and the drain of a prolonged ground war.
Yes quite and I bet NATO SFs are training the insurgents and putting weapons in right now just in case. So Russia, with an economy smaller than Italy, is going to maintain an anti insurgent campaign in the Ukraine for 10 years with sanctions and all the casualties – I don’t think so. Maybe Vlad does but that is where miscalculation lies…
Yes.
I’m guessing that SAS troops are somewhere in there.
I wonder just how many troops Russia have actiallt moved. And I wonder how much of this is because Putin has to do things keep the Army busy, as opposed to keeping the Army busy with Putin.
And I wonder who is next in line after Putin? Putin and his family and cronies has zillions salted away. How can that be protected from whoever comes next?
From what i have read the number of Russian Troops Deployed are around 100 k.
This may be true, but I’ve been prompted to look and the BBC quote Ukraine as having 14,000 troops close to the border. 16 tactical battalion groups. They have 40,000in the Crimea.
Who are you referring too when you say ‘insurgents’ and why would NATO SF be training them ?.
Good words. Let’s hope they will be backed up with concrete force if Russia tries an invasion. Demonstrate resolve & give a clear message before it’s too late.
This strongly worded letter should sort it all out then….
Yep we could threaten them with a full written report!!!
NATO need to put an action plan in place for Ukraine and integrate them into the bloc. Russia would then be faced with a democratic state on its border.
Isn’t that like crashing your car and then taking out an insurance policy? I understand its not (all) the fault of Ukraine that they are in this position but i doubt its NATO’s intent to end up in a hot war by allowing Ukraine immediate full membership and invoking the mutual defence clause.
I understand what you are saying, it is a tricky situation. However, back in 2008 NATO met in Bucharest and announced it was looking at membership for Ukraine and Georgia but didn’t put an action plan in place. I think the bloc missed out on an opportunity there to bolster its eastern flank and send a resolute message to Moscow. There must be a way for the west to support Ukraine but understand the hesitancy.
I wonder what if any affect this is having on our own eFP Battle Groups in Poland and Estonia?
None at all i would guess – now if Russia was building up Forces close to the Baltic States that would be another matter.
Does anyone else sit back and look at what is happening in the world with the Russian build up around Ukraine & the Chinese build up around Taiwan and worry that they are going to both hit each country at the same time?
Not saying they are in cahoots but you can bet they are watching the other closely. If I were going to gamble on an invasion that would provoke NATO/Western powers I’d certainly try my luck while their eye was elsewhere.
You can bet Russia invading Ukraine would provoke a US response… Unless maybe the US was occupied in the SCS with China invading Taiwan. Maybe the US would leave Russia to the UK & Europe to deal with and we all know how that would pan out… Interesting times!
I thought that too, then had a look at how China are geared up for amphibious operations. They are building ships very quickly but their LHDs are under construction and so many of the LPDs are the same or brand new. I would have thought it would be years before they are ready, but stranger things have happened.
Russia on the other hand are playing a good game. Give everyone in Donetsk Russian passports and build up troops near the border. Wait to see what Ukraine and the West do, then possibly move into separatist areas to secure them and protect their citizens. I think that would be below the threshold of war and can’t see anyone doing anything to stop them, not unless they move into areas they don’t currently control.
That’s why it’s unforgivable that Europe is so willing to underfund its military on the belief the US will always be there alongside them. The economies of Europe should be more than capable of countering Russia in terms of conventional non nuclear capability. They just choose not to…
Between Poland, Germany, France and the UK we have more than enough to counter Russia. It is the political will to combine and do something about it that is missing. I can’t imagine for a second it would happen without the US.
Putin’s development of new types of nuclear weapons are simply despicable. The weapons are horrific. Putin is a manifestation of a psychosis that is deeply ingrained in Russia. He and the evolved paranoia of Russians are a significant threat to peace. But before jumping to predictable opinions about Eastern Ukraine consider this.
In the Falklands, an external power acted to defend a population, of a small territory, that had voted for continued links with that mother power rather than be subsumed by another nation that spoke a completely different language and was of different ethnic background.
In the Ukraine, a population of a small territory, repeatedly voted for closer links with a mother nation that speaks the same language and of the same ethnic background rather than be completely subsumed by a power with a different language and ethnicity.
One common feature. In both cases there was and is strong domestic support to defend the democratic rights and choices of their cousins.
Putin burns with a desire to avenge the destruction of the USSR, but the Eastern Ukraine is not primarily part of that agenda.
In contrast China’s plans in the South China Sea and East China Sea are nothing short of an unjustified aggressive nationalistic policy of conquest.
There situation is eerily similar to the Sudetenland and Appeasement.
Soon the West will be faced with the same decision on what to do with China.
But the is the Eastern Ukraine different.
Russian is the language of the poor in Ukraine. Ukrainian is traditionally that of the middle class. The language elements and others are much more nuanced than that. Indeed, the simplicity of the language argument is one propagated by Putin’s info war teams
There was an agreement for NATO to leave certain states alone that surround Russia, to act as buffer states if you will. I imagine Russia believes that NATO broke that agreement by sponsoring a colour rebellion in Ukraine (whether or not they actually did). Ergo now I believe Russia will seek to retain Ukraine as a buffer state in some shape or form. Invading Ukraine with the little green men was actually a very weak move, bourne out of a lack of options and desperation (I believe). It would have been much more strong if Russia could have continued to influence Ukraine in a much more subtle manner. That said I see two long term options as to how this will play out. Either Russia will create a north Korea scenario with eastern Ukraine, effectively splitting the country in half, the western half will be aligned with the EU and the eastern with Russia. Or Ukraine will be kept in a long term destabilised state. If I was guessing I’d say Russia would hope for the former as it’s less messy and potentially more permanent and thus beneficial for them. The risk with the second option is there is more scope for Western low key military involvement, which could tip the balance of power in the west’s favour. I’m not saying anyone is the goody nor the baddy here, this is simply a long term jiu-jitsu wrestling match for geopolitical power.
I think this is part of a much grander strategy with Russia and China working together.
NATO can hardly focus on China when Russia is making moves in Europe and the North.
It keeps the US army out of the Pacific.
The Pacific is mainly the USMC’s area of responsibility. It was the USMC and USN that was mainly doing all the fighting in the Pacific in WW2.
Exactly Merion, andthe US Army has been trying very hard to become relevant, they know the DoD budget is falling and they are aware of your point, that they are not so relevant and so their share of the defense budget was thought to the where the cuts will come. Hence why they have been publishing lots of pieces recently about how they can become more relevant in the pacific.
With Russia’s move this will screw up that plan and the Army will have to focus on the European domain. That are already giving up, or completely outmaneuverd in the Middle East.
This forces America to split their forces, much like WW2, and keeps their costs extremely high and expeditionary.
In contrast both China and Russia cost are extremely low, as they are in their own territories and can deny access to their immediate environments.
Masterful.
US Defence policy /doctrine has always been based around the Capability to fight Two High Intensity Conflicts in different areas at the same time.