Putin holds G1 summit

Source: Euromaidan Art & Graphics FB

Source: Euromaidan Art & Graphics FB 

2015/06/09 • The Naked Truth

Moscow (dpo) – In response to the Crimea crisis, Russian president Vladimir Putin has ordered the formation of a new summit group. According to RIA-Novosti, the other seven countries – the US, Germany, Great Britain, France, Canada, Japan and Italy – are to be expelled. For the first meeting of the new G1, which is set for June in Moscow, the Kremlin chief has promised that “absolutely no one will be missing.”

With the expulsion of the seven countries, the Russian president has guaranteed that only the in his view “most powerful industrial countries” will be granted access to the conference. Invitations to the June meeting have already been sent, according to Kremlin spokesman Sergei Budnik. The heads of state of the ex-G8 countries expelled by Russia expressed their deep regret at the move taken by the Russian president, but are divided over an appropriate reaction. On this account, the US announced the founding of its own G1 summit. Great Britain, Germany, France and the remaining countries plan to follow suit with unilateral summits. A long-term goal – according to Chancellor Angela Merkel – is to renegotiate everything in the framework of so-called G1-G1-G1-G1-G1-G1-G1-G1 summits (with Russia included, again).

Editor’s Note: Everything we publish in the section The Naked Truth is dead serious and, unlike our usual propaganda and lies, true. It should be taken literally. 

Translated by: A.K.
Source: Der Postillon, March 25, 2014
Source: Euromaidan Art & Graphics

Tags: ,

  • Brent

    Too funny!!! I still find it funny how no other leaders wanted to sit with Putin at lunch at the G20 in Australia last year. He’s made Russia into a pariah state like North Korea.

    In all seriousness, time to kick Russia’s mafia government out of the WTO and other international organizations until the learn to respect other country’s sovereignty and international law.

    • Common Sense

      and where exactly did Russia disrespect another country’s sovereignty? Was it in Iraq? Libya? Afghanistan? Yemen? Vietnam? Korea? Syria? Palestine? Chechnya maybe? Georgia? Or, after a peaceful majority vote, Crimea? Where?

      • Michel Cloarec

        Lets see now ! last 100 years: Sovjet actions in Europe ?
        Latvia,Lithuania, Estonia, Finlande, Poland +……
        After WWI, treaty in Paris . Crimea to Ukraine ssr ! 1954 corroborated by Krutchev ! Budapest treaty !
        Crimea votes was a farce , and you know that perfectly. 9 countries have recognized Crimea . Comedy votes in lnr/dpr !
        There are no oasis on Mars ! study history better !

        • Common Sense

          One. Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, Poland + … ALL of which regained their independence. Largely peacefully too I might add.

          Two. The Crimea vote is exactly what it was: a democratic vote which did not have the result the West wants. Should the vote’s result have been “stay with Ukraine”, it certainly would have been seen as legit by the same countries which oppose it now. This annexation was… peaceful as well.

          Question to you. What exactly makes you think Russia has the same expansionist policy the West (and certainly the US) has? What actions does Mr. Putin take which makes you so convinced that he wants to annex further countries? How do these actions compare to these the West / the US has taken since after WWII?

          • Michel Cloarec

            What is RF doing in Georgia ? in Moldavia ? In Crimea ? In Ukraine ? Why is RF not in G7 ? Why is Rf not in G20 ?
            Is it illwilling from West ?
            Putin has only one alternative is to gain as many countries back , to go back to URSS size as to stands against the Indo/chino march to conquer !

          • Common Sense

            Georgia? There are two sides to the conflict. I do suppose you have read about both of these, and not only digested the Western position? What makes you convinced the Western side is the correct one? Same goes for the current Ukraine conflict really.

            The RF is not any more in the G8, G7 nor G20, because it is not invited – as simple as that. Furthermore, the G7 at this moment could be perceived as quite the farce. It is a group organized around the interest of the US where, apparently, dissident opinions are far from welcome. It currently is composed of countries which gullibly stand behind the US’s political discourse and does far from represent the biggest countries. Without Russia, China, India and Brazil, how much of the world’s population does it actually represent?

            Why would Russia, a country with its share of economic hardships, really want economically worthless states like a lot of these in the Baltics, including Ukraine? The RF has enough troubles of its own. How exactly would Russia be strengthened by annexing them? What exactly would it gain by doing so?

            And why do you feel Russia not being big enough to stand “against the Indo / Chino march to conquer (????)”. Where do you read India and China indeed want to conquer anything? I must be misunderstanding you here. That doesn’t make sense at all. Quite on the contrary, the economic “conquest” by said countries seem to favour Russia now with all the agreements they are signing with the former Soviet Union. They even are taking steps to move away from the dollar now, and who can blame them?

            How can you support the Western aggressive approach towards Russia, which, frankly, unnecessarily creates a whole lot of instability in the region? You seem to perceive the (peaceful, i.e. without bloodshed) annexation of Crimea as a crime. Do you think the same about the unlawful invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Palestine, Yemen?

          • Michel Cloarec

            Many words without any content. Not to accept to face the truth , keeps everyone in a status quo.

            URSS has since the coup in 1917 always hidden the truth to its citizens and to the world. Since the coup in 1991, RF does the same !

            Russia’s invasion of Crimea, reflects Putin’s longstanding desire to reacquire territory lost through the collapse of the Soviet Union. This incursion violates a treaty Russia signed in 1994 with Ukraine, the United States and the United Kingdom in which Ukraine surrendered its nuclear weapons in return for a commitment by Moscow to accept and respect it territorial sovereignty.

            Putin will go down in history as the Russian who shattered what remains of a historic link between Russians and Ukrainians. Putin visited Kiev asserting that centuries-old ties between the two peoples, dating back to the time of Kievan Rus, is the foundation for his vision of Eurasian Union.

            Noting : Eurasian vision . That is where all the problems are and where the truth is.

            Moscow should recall the intensity of the Ukrainian resistance to Moscow’s occupation after World War II and be aware that seizure of part of Ukraine, even just Crimea, will ensure that an intensely anti-Russia state is created on its border.

            Putin’s occupation of Crimea will fuel the secessionist fire in the Russian Caucasus. If a Russian majority in Crimea can force its secession from Ukraine on purely ethnic grounds, why shouldn’t Chechens, Dagestanis, Circassians and other minorities in Russia have the same right? With Crimea a stone’s throw from the Caucasus, which has suffered two recent wars over Chechnya’s desire for independence – and which today faces violent separatist movements, it is surprising that Moscow is giving legitimacy to ethnic separatism.

            Putin’s entire strategy of political, economic, and military coercion toward Ukraine will set back Russia’s relations with its other neighbors, particularly those in the Black Sea region, the Caucasus and Central Asia. It certainly betrays the underlying objective driving Putin’s vision for Eurasia Union – the creation of a set of satellite states in the space of the former Soviet Union that have surrendered much, if not all, of their sovereignty to Moscow.

            Noting again : Eurasia Union .

            But as the US and its allies decide what costs they are willing to impose for Russia’s aggression, they should consider how to leverage the additional price that Russia will pay in its own back yard. The West’s response should include ensuring that Moscow’s policy-makers and, indeed, the Russian people, recognize how Putin’s provocative use of force in Ukraine could generate a wider crisis of unpredictable and adverse consequences, including for Russia’s own internal security.

            That is the truth ! That is what one must face to understand what has been going on for 24 years and putin has been behind all that even before he came to power. 1989 has been a marking point for him !

          • Common Sense

            Thanks for the intelligible words you wrote. I appreciate them, although I, given how this power-play unfolds, find it difficult to agree with them.

            You refer to the 1994 treaty where in which Moscow accepted Ukraine’s independence. It did indeed and it was only last year when Russia, given the very strange and dubious coup d’état instating the US-friendly Poroshenko in office, “breached” it. Since their (after majority vote) annexation of Crimea, Moscow has repeatedly stated they are not willing, nor eyeing annexation of further territories.

            You go as far back as Kievan Rus to state your claim, which sounds like stretching things to me. Should we indeed want to go back to the 800’s to 1200’s, we should readdress more or less the complete world and their power distribution, no?

            Should Chechens, Dagestanis, Circassians and other minorities in Russia or anywhere else for that matter choose to depart from anywhere else, then who is anybody not to heed that call?

            You refer to Russia’s involvement in the current Ukraine troubles as an aggression, while you are not mentioning how the UN and NATO are not only imposing suffocating sanctions, but are speaking as well as acting using provocative lines and drills, indeed, in Russia’s back-yard.

            You also mention Russia’s (provocative) use of force, while that (provocative) use of force has only been demonstrated using conjectural intel, one-sided views and disputable footage.

            You disregard how Poroshenko has been backed by the US since at least 2006, how some of its ministers have been granted Ukraine citizenship a mere day before they were instated in office and how a US-backed Georgian now is governor to Odessa. And you apparently do not seem to question how the US and NATO are having military drills provocatively close to Russia’s borders, how they are supporting a regime which hires extreme-right extremists as advisors to the government and how they are amassing troops and material in Baltic states.

            You forget how Russia still is offering aid to Ukraine, is giving it impossibly favourable prices for gas supplies to that country and how it has repeatedly worded approaches to world conflicts which, to me, seem to be quite more balanced than the Western stance surrounding global problems.

            I say all that as a 100% Western guy too. I find it impossibly sickening that my country and culture takes such a provocative stance.

  • Michel Cloarec

    Extremly funny !

  • Czech Friend

    I am not laughing anymore since this poor sod of a terrorist scum is allowed to kidnap people in their countries and hold them hostage. And not even that, he cynically uses them for his twisted propaganda.

    Evil personified that just wasn’t countered properly by our politicians. People we voted in to protect us against such bastards like the dwarf.

    How come ruskie crooks are allowed to travel freely in EU while its citizen was kidnapped? If diplomacy couldn’t secure release of the hostage in a year then I guess it’s time to change strategy and apply eye for eye gameplan.

    Russian terrorism will not stand.

  • Vol Ya

    How appropriate, a photo of putin sitting all by himself. That is not a surprise since he has no true friends. The only friends he has, if you can call it that, are people that he has bribed or blackmailed to be his friend. Putin even has to pay people, Russian trolls, to say good things about him and bad things about Ukraine. How pathetic. What a total loser.

    • Common Sense

      He only has China, India and Brazil, which, together with Russia would make for a larger GDP than the G7’s. Should he need to pay Russians for his vote, he should be damn rich. 80% approval rating? Which Western leader can boast these numbers?

      • Michel Cloarec

        With ” WOULD “, you could sell oil from the Moon or Mars.
        Russia (rf) has 22,9 M people living under poverty level. 2% of asyl seekers in EU are from RF : 200 000 RF citizens are leaving RF every years for the last 5 years ! WHY ? don´t you think China or Brazil or India know that. Do you think BRICS are stupid people who believe in the bluff of RF ?
        80% rating is an utopia ! say 60 % and maybe it could be believed.
        But routine election have no reality, that is why putin has to invest in propaganda and subvertive actions to keep rf citizens quite !

        • Common Sense

          About poverty. There seems to be a slightly smaller percentage of people in Russia living below the poverty line than in the US. So, what’s your point? Russia has had a very turbulent last 20 years and it seems to finally balance out towards “stability”.
          Migration. You can not discuss emigration without immigration. As far as I am able to deduct, net migration actually has been positive (more people coming in than leaving) over the last 20 years.
          Approval rating. 60% still is a number most, if not all, foreign leaders can only dream of.
          Elections. There indeed does not seem to be a valid and strong alternative to Putin at the moment. Not with these approval rates.
          Propaganda. We are approaching the US elections again. Track the amount of propaganda, as well as mud-slinging and extremely questionable tactics, the presidential hopefuls will use the coming 2 years. How can you be against “Putin’s propaganda” and not call these used in and by the West into question?