British paratroopers in Ukraine. Click to see full-size image
In early October 2020, rumors started circulating Ukrainian media that the UK would ‘assist’ Ukraine in building two new Naval bases, on the shore of the Sea of Azov, as well as in the Black Sea.
Considering that not so long ago, the British paratroopers during the exercises staged a large-scale landing in the south of Ukraine, the bases which Dmitry Kuleba, the Ukrainian Foreign Minister, hinted at weren’t that much of a surprise.
On October 7th, President Volodymyr Zelensky in London announced the signing of a multibillion-dollar military contract with Britain. Which concerns the same Nikolaev region.
On the eve of Zelensky’s visit to Britain, Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba made a number of hints about the British military presence in Ukraine.
The BBC announced to Kuleba that readers liked the landing of British paratroopers in the Nikolaev area during a recent exercise.
“There were even calls to be held more often, especially in the southern regions of Ukraine,” the journalists said.
The Foreign Minister said the following:
“We are not against it. If they parachute there and remain, we will not object either.”
That is, there were no actual words about the military base. But it is clear that the British paratroopers cannot “remain” on the bare ground.
Therefore, the invitation to be based in Ukraine sounded completely unambiguous.
The Ukrainian minister said that the British have become Kiev’s main partners in the fight against “Russian disinformation.” And he made a cryptic statement:
“It was not for nothing that the British paratroopers landed.” The hint sounds as if Kiev has far-reaching military plans for the British.
He said that on October 7-8, Zelensky will go to London and sign a number of agreements.
“We will sign an agreement on political cooperation, free trade and strategic partnership between our countries. The document is very large, complex, in fact it is a new framework for our relations. Secondly, we will talk very seriously about cooperation in the security sector,” Kuleba said.
He did not clarify this issue in detail. But he added meaningfully: “By leaving the EU, Great Britain will have more room for maneuver, it may be tougher in some issues. It is beneficial to us.”
Zelensky announced the signing of a memorandum with the UK:
“This is the signing of a memorandum on the development of the navy. An important strategic document, we will be at the naval base, we will sign this memorandum worth 1.25 billion pounds. We all believed that the navy would appear in Ukraine again.” Zelensky said.
It is important that the 1.25 billion pounds that London will allocate to Ukraine is not gratuitous aid, but a 10-year loan that will have to be repaid.
Approximately a week later, it turned out that the Ukrainian Navy would operate the new bases, but that doesn’t actually mean the UK and potentially US can’t actively and almost permanently utilize them.
Military expert, reserve colonel Oleg Zhdanov noted that even if the deployment of foreign military bases were allowed, this would not bring Ukraine closer to joining NATO:
“We are unlikely to be taken there for strategic and political reasons, since NATO will not enter into an armed confrontation with the Russian Federation.” The military expert believes that the new Ukrainian military bases, which are planned to be built with the help of Western allies, will provide security guarantees: although the allies are not going to fight for Ukraine, “but all military and technical assistance to protect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine and the United States, will provide”.
The Zelenskiy administration is circulating a five-point “questionnaire” slated to be voted on October 18th. There are questions about corruption, marijuana, deputies.
But the fifth point is:
“Do you support Ukraine’s right to use the security guarantees defined by the Budapest Memorandum to restore state sovereignty and territorial integrity?”
What is the Budapest Memorandum? This is an agreement signed in 1994 under which Ukraine renounced nuclear weapons in exchange for security guarantees from the signatory parties. And it was signed by four countries: Ukraine, Russia, USA and Great Britain.
The implementation of the treaty gives the West a legal basis for intervention and the possibility of organizing a full-fledged military presence in the country, bypassing the NATO charter, to which you are so fond of referring here. And in addition, the implementation of the memorandum officially introduces into Ukrainian politics, in addition to the United States, the UK, which after leaving the EU is actively building its own quasi-empire of a new type.
Thus, NATO member states are creating another formal pretext of the expansion of their military infrastructure in Ukraine. As the ‘Russian invasion’ narrative is covered with dust and no Europeans are willing to die in Ukraine to fight back some imaginary Russian intervention.
Additionally to the expansion of the military infrastructure, managing Ukrainian political processes and looting the country, the so-called ‘democratic world’ is also aggressively implanting neo-liberal and globalist ideology in the country. To meet the demands of its Western puppeteers, the Kiev regime not only introduced a wide-scale censorship and political persecutions campaign, but in fact has been waging a war on the part of the Ukrainian population that stands against or does not support enough this new ideology. As a part of this campaign, Kiev and its foreign masters de-facto limit rights of citizens that are critical towards the current regime and its ‘European way’ and seek to destroy any groups and entities that may pose even a theoretical threat to the dominance of this new narrative. After getting rid of most of independent media and suppressing the opposition, these pro-globalist forces also attacked the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate). The Ukrainian sovereignty and real interests of its citizens are in fact being undermined in order to fulfil the demands of Ukraine’s ‘strategic partners’ in the West.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Nato in all but name,Russia needs to let them know who is in charge of that area.
Fine with me. It seemes some here dont know what Nato is.
Britain will build a base, but Britain can’t build the war materials to fill the base ffs.
They have 6 destroyers and a few frigates to defend the two large amphibious ships they built, and have already cut the number of aircraft they already agreed to buy.
The ship is a rental, when the US don’t need one of their own ships, they simply take it from Britain.
Rent-a-War COSCO style.
Rothschild has a slate loose… That is quite obvious.
Rotchild are very good in wine and cigars.
Your version of how big the world is must be based on shoesand maybee only one leg. That seemes to include Your economic relations to Our world according to You comment around Poland as well as the Lublin agreement.
Here maps show that the Bolsjevics moved Russia itself west too. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5e86d6d2cc2f3bd9f77850f3d6df4b3532d07f690bfbbb6fe7ed69acc037c954.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a34e268067814a3c87681bd2d658ab391d071f3045569e41410800811ddc912f.png
nice maps
Ukraine is a business not a country, the global Ziocorporate terrorists own it all, except for the little strategic part that’s Crimea, Russia’s most remarkable achievement on Putin’s game of “business and partnership” with the terrorist Ziocorporatists.
Putin sell Russia, he do nothing but make money with Jew master, now NATO visit Russia soon. Ukraine today, Belarus tomorrow and Russia next week hahahah
Time for Russia to build a couple of bases in Venezuela and Cuba.
Nah, just have a nuclear powered battle cruiser, guided missile cruiser or guided missile frigate doing constant circuits of the North Sea off of Dogger Bank.
Without ships, subs, coastal defense its useless.
Erdogan will come over land anyway.
It’ll be an intel hub as well. Closer than the Brits can get now. Early warning, monitoring Russian naval movement etc. The bitch doing the work of its master. The UK is wracking up great future pain, its military is degraded and in no way capable of dealing with Russian military, it makes money building ports but can’t protect them. The sly little fox will be eaten by the bear.
Funny thing is the UK Defence Budget is similar to the Russian Defence Budget, give or take a $billion. Look how wisely Russia spends her budget, compared to how run down the UK Forces, weapons and systems are? When we cannot even defend our own territory, how can we support bases in Ukraine?
What a bunch of retards here in the comments… idon’t know if you are mossad or CIA bots or what, but you need to be brain dead to say the things that you said.
You don’t simply get baited by the enemy and behave the way that your enemy wants you to behave. If you see NAZITO aggression open wide it’s because of a reason, the pirates are good being sneaky, Russia should be (and for now it is) aware of the situation and move with precaution, the U.S it’s desperate, the more you wait the more they implode from the inside.
Also, remember, Erdogan it’s a traitor to Turkey. he’s a Zionist bitch, which is far worse than a Zionist, because his actions won’t lead (at least publicly) to the perpetrators, that’s why satanyahu it’s using Erdogan so wildly.
Budapest Memorandum and non-proliferation nuclear treaty, back in 1994, article 5 was specifically worded to give Russia the right to protect her people from attack, wherever they may be, by nuclear or non-nuclear nations. The treaty, signed by Sergey Lavrov, the Russian Ambassador to the UN, the Ukraine equivalent, John Major, UK Prime Minister and Bill Clinton. US and UK refused to go with wording Ukraine wanted, which was US and UK to go in and fight Russia, if Ukraine antagonised them. The 1994 UK Prime Minister Classified Papers, recently released, explain the argument.
The Clown President has just had an audience with Prince William and his wife in Buck House. Not sure where granny and grandad were.
Sea of Azov, how wide and deep is it? How will they manage to build two naval ports, without intruding on Russian territory?
Why is the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office so loyal to Ukraine? Why does Bill Browder have so much control in the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office?
Why are so many exiled Russians, with dual nationality, living in South Kensington, donate heavily to the party Boris leads?
Why is the UK so obsessed with Ukraine?
Why is “AM Hants” so obsessed with Ukraine? Why does “AM Hants” distort the facts re the Budapest Memorandum?
hey whiny, if you complain about someone’s perception of something, put it right by providing the correct interpretation according to your view!
What facts have I distorted Bruno?
What are the exact words in Article 5 of both the Memorandum, plus the more important United Nations Security Council non-nuclear Proliferation Treaty? Signed by dear Sergey Lavrov, John Major and Bill Clinton?
Remember Ukraine was only storing the missiles, that Russia had the carriers and codes for, for the Soviet Union. How much did Ukraine receive to give up storing them?
How much did Russia pay to settle the debts of the 15 Member Bolshevik Union?
How much did Senator Obama, believe it was 2006 hand over to Ukraine to give up their domestic weapons?
What did the 1994, UK Prime Minister’s Classified Paper’s which were released acouple of years ago have to say about the precise wording used in Article 5 of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum?
In fact, in the same papers don’t they also repeat the views of the UK Ministers and US Ministers, regards Ukraine losing Crimea to Russia, owing to Ukraine having no respect, whatsoever, to the people of Crimea.
The Comedian and his friends might believe the UK Forces will be prepared to knock up a couple of Naval Bases in the Sea of Azov and move in, however the UK Forces do not have the manpower, when they cannot even secure their home based. Plus, the shallow and small sea, would be problematic, should the plans go ahead.
Why does Burisma Holdings heavily donate to the Atlantic Council? What do they get in return?
Why is the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, so generous to the needs of the tax payer funded, Atlantic Council or NATO Think Tank?
Where? Already in your first sentence, hants. The Budapest Memorandum was written to protect Ukraine, by giving it assurances, after becoming a non-nuclear-weapon State (ie handing over the nuclear weapons to Russia).
5. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm, in the case of the Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a state in association or alliance with a nuclear weapon state.
.Nowhere is it “specifically worded to give Russia the right to protect her people from attack, wherever they may be, by nuclear or non-nuclear nations”. There hasn’t been any attack attack on “themselves”. That is just your distorting fantasy.
Not interested in your other blahblah. Facts, hants.
Why is “AM Hants” so obsessed with Ukraine?
“except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces or their allies, by such a state in association or alliance with a nuclear weapon state”
So Bruno darling, riddle me this, why won’t NATO officially go into Donetsk and give it the Iraq treatment? Is it not because the UNSC agreement, that mirrors the Memo, allows Russia to defend her people from the alliance of a nuclear weapon state?
Remind little Bruno, but, have you checked out the “1994 Declassified Papers of the UK Prime Minister John Major”? You can find them in the UK National Archives. They discuss the CIS, including concerns with regards Crimea and Ukraine, around January-February 1994. I would suggest you take the time to read what was said and discussed.
Russian citizens in DPR & LPR now about 370 000.
There was no “attack on themselves”. There was no “attack on their territories”. There was no “attack on their dependent territories”. There was no “attack on their armed forces”. There was no “attack on their allies”. There was no attack by “such a state in association or alliance with a nuclear weapon state”. Just propaganda, hants. Just wriggling to justify what can’t be justified, breaching an agreement, violating the sovereignty of a state. Leading to an illegal annexation.
Why is “AM Hants” so obsessed with Ukraine?
Guess you have not heard of Russian DNA? Remember, Eastern Ukraine was actually Novorussia, part of Russia, prior to 1917 and a certain Bolshevik, known as Lenin (wasn’t he related to the Rothschild’s by marriage?). Sorry I digress, but, Lenin took Novorussia from Russia and handed it to Ukraine. You will notice the difference in the DNA of those from Galicia and those with Russian DNA, in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. Hence Russia, emphasising their right to protect there people.
Now little Bruno, you never answered why NATO and Kiev are begging Russia to invade. Why is that? Why can’t NATO officially go in and give Eastern Ukraine the Iraq or Yugoslavia treatment? Why won’t Russia walk into the trap? Which takes us back to the precise wording, demanded by Russia, Ukraine and the UK in Article 5 of the memo and corresponding UNSC Non-Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, signed back in 1994.
“Russian DNA”?? LMAO. Hants, there is nothing about DNA in the Budapest Memorandum. May I also remind you that the violation of that Memorandum concerns the annexation of Crimea in the first place. What’s Russia doing in eastern Ukraine? Invading a sovereign country? Thought they deny that. You blahblah too much, hants. You haven’t answered the question yet:
Why is “AM Hants” so obsessed with Ukraine. Why is “a house wife from Hampshire” so obsessed with Ukraine?
Keep laughing little Bruno.
What does Article 5 of the Memo state?
What does Article 5 of the UNSC Non Nuclear Proliferation Treaty state?
What did the US and UK, back in 1994 say, about Ukraine losing Crimea, owing to their stupidity and lack of investment in Crimea and the people of Crimea?
Annexation of Crimea??????? What is the meaning of self determination?
Would you class self determination as 0ver 80% of the electorate voting and over 90% wishing to return to Russia?
Did the people of Ukraine ever get a say in whether they should be moved from Russia to Ukraine, back in 1954, just because the Ukrainian leader of the Soviet Union Bolshevik Communist wished to say thanks to the people of Ukraine, for their vote?
When Yanukovic, on 21 February 2014, in front of EU witnesses, such as the Polish, French and German Foreign Ministers, agreed to stand down, bring elections, due later in the year forward, and revert back to the Constitution of 2004, if they promised that Ukraine would have a peaceful transition. Hours later, Russia was saving the lives of the President and his family from an assassination attempt. The President of Ukraine then chose to go to Crimea, rather than Russia, owing to the fact that he was still the President of Ukraine.
The people of Crimea, owing to Kiev refusal to view Yanukovic as President and declaring new elections in May, left the independent Autonomous Republic of Crimea to decide on using self determination, which the UN Charter is based on, to hold a referendum for the people to choose to stay aligned with Ukraine or go home to Russia.
What does Article 28 of the Ukraine Constitution 2004 say?
Article 28. Everybody has a right to respect to his dignity.
“Nobody can be subject to torture, cruel, superhuman or such, that humiliates his dignity, to the conduct or punishment. Nobody without its free consent can be subject to the medical, scientific or other experiments.”…
How does that fit into the documentary below?
Crimea The Way Home EN Subtitles Full Documentary HD…. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbGhKfWrfOQ
Blah blah blah. Why is “AM Hants” (“a house wife from Hampshire”) so obsessed with Ukraine?
Ooops, meant Russia, US and UK, not Ukraine, who wanted it worded differently, so UK and US would be at their beck and call.
AM, thought I would re-post this for your idiotic critics:
About the Budapest Memorandum NOT being a binding document, from the ENEMY, no less, the FACTS, officially too (& not from the BS MSM), from the ukrainian ambassador to London:
”Q76 Lord Radice:…Do you still consider that the 1994 Budapest Memorandum…still holds? Do you still believe in that agreement?
Ambassador Andrii Kuzmenko:…It was a declaration rather than a legally binding document.”
http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/eu-sub-c-external-affairs-committee/eu-and-russia/oral/11977.html
Thanks Ralph. Have you got a copy of the John Major Papers of 1994. I had a copy of them and think they were released around November 2017, but, the computer I stored them on has gone sick and not letting me access my files. Goggly has had a clean out and not so easy to find. Although, I think I can find them if in the mood. They are well worth bookmarking.
No, sorry, don’t know about those papers.
They released the classified papers of the UK Prime Minister, from 1994 around November 2017.
Well worth reading if you can find a copy. Was it Douglas Hurd, who was Foreign Secretary under Major?
Anyway, they went into Ukraine. Voicing concern that Ukraine would lose Crimea, owing to lack of investment and lack of respect of the people. The UK Government did not seem that impressed with Ukrainian politicians. Plus, they went into detail with regards the wording of Article 5 of the Budapest Memo, which is the same as the UNSC Non-Nuclear Proliferation Treaty. The words Ukraine demanded, was for UK and US to take on Russia, if necessary. Which the UK and US had no intention of doing, so changed the wording to allow Russia to defend her people, if actions dictated.
Russia Today had a link to the actual released papers, in one of her articles.
Interesting reading the answers whilst trying to keep a straight face.
Memories of 2014 followed by one heck of a learning curve. How the people of Donetsk have survived it all is one of the wonders of the world. Do wish them all the best.
Good luck with that UK.
inside the kerch-bridge, doesn’t make a lot of sense since the uki-navy in the sea of Azov will be sitting ducks and the way out can be closed at a seconds notice. but the perfide english are prone to meddle and during the russian revolution 1917 they sent a military force to preserve the tsar and his family and the tsar-reign. failed miserably, like most things they undertake.
the ugly older lesbian sister taking advantage of the little bleyad cousin; a romance made in purgatory