Russian pranksters frame Polish Foreign Minister Sikorski
The two Russian pranksters Vovan and Lexus have specialized in calling Western politicians and other celebrities under false names and they often manage to elicit some interesting things from their interlocutors. I know them both personally, have been on their television show several times as an expert and have also conducted an interesting interview with them on Anti-Spiegel-TV, which you can watch here .
If you've never heard of them before, you can find here , here , here , here and here examples of what the boys do . By the way, my favorite was this story , which we also talked about in the interview.
Now they have for Polish Foreign Minister Sikorski fallen , who believed he was talking to former Ukrainian President Poroshenko. Here you will find the entire conversation, which was conducted in English, the most important statements of which I will summarize in this article.
Is Poland sending Ukrainians to war?
On the question of whether Poland will send Ukrainians home to war, Sikorski said Poland is “ready to help conscript Ukrainians in Poland.” Anyone who avoids compulsory military service should not receive any social benefits. However, he also said that a European solution was needed, otherwise Ukrainians would travel around the EU and “look for the best deal”.
Against this background, the demands of German politicians who demand the same are interesting. However, this contradicts international law, because international humanitarian law prohibits sending people back to war.
This becomes clear when you compare it with the statements made by German politicians about Syrians who fled the war to Germany. Sending them back to Syria was unthinkable for German politicians because their lives were in danger in the war.
But this regulation apparently doesn't apply to Ukrainians, say the German warmongers, who apparently like nothing more than for Russians and Ukrainians to kill each other.
The energy crisis in Ukraine
Sikorski told "Petro Poroshenko" that the energy crisis in Ukraine is the most important problem not only for Kiev, but also for the EU, because now 70 percent of Ukraine's electricity generation capacity has been destroyed. If the situation worsens, most of Ukraine would become uninhabitable and “we would see another large wave of refugees.”
This is probably the card that Polish Prime Minister Tusk wants to play, as he wants to increase Polish coal production and Polish coal-fired power generation in order to supply electricity to Ukraine. In his opinion , Brussels should pay the bill because Ukraine cannot afford electricity at European prices. With the argument that this would prevent a wave of refugees from Ukraine in the winter, Tusk's calculation could work.
Corruption in Ukraine
Speaking about corruption in Ukraine, Sikorski said:
“Corruption is the shortest and fastest way for Ukraine to lose Western support. If it is true - we always hear the same stories, if they are confirmed - then the willingness to spend European money on Ukraine will disappear very quickly. And that could be very bad for your country.”
It is no secret that the stories about corruption are true. Essentially, it was more of a threat, because if the Western media were let off the leash and allowed to report on corruption in Ukraine on a large scale, that would be the end of Western support. Ultimately, Sikorski's statement only made it clear that Kiev must remain obedient if it wants to prevent this scenario.
A possible Polish participation in the war
Poland could train “a few Ukrainian brigades” in its own country, “but Polish soldiers in Ukraine, that is impossible,” said Sikorski. This is interesting because Sikorski often publicly supports Macron's idea of sending Western soldiers to Ukraine. Sikorski later addressed this, but called it a bluff intended to unsettle Russia. In fact, the willingness in the West to send (fighting) troops to Ukraine is “nil.”
But he also said that could change “if the front collapses” or if Russia takes Odessa. Or if there is a peace agreement under which, for example, UN peacekeepers are sent to Ukraine, then Polish soldiers could be there.
Sikorski emphasized that “there is no desire in Western Europe to wage war with Russia.” And he added:
“My prime minister wouldn’t want to do that. You know that we are now discussing whether we should launch Russian cruise missiles over your airspace from our airspace. And even that is very, very controversial at this stage. And there is no agreement on this because that would mean entering the war.”
This means that Sikorski's public calls for Russian missiles to be fired from Poland over Ukraine are also (at least for now) a bluff intended to unsettle Russia.
If Trump wins the election...
Sikorski also commented on what would happen if Trump wins the US election:
“The U.S. interests and yours do not align, but they know their credibility is at stake. Neither this nor the next administration can let the matter go down the drain as this will affect their credibility in the eyes of all allies.”
Sikorski also said he had spoken to people on the Trump team who told him they don't know what Trump will actually do, but that they think Trump will threaten Putin "with escalation to get a better deal." close". Sikorski emphasized that he didn't know for sure.
However, if this is Trump's alleged plan to quickly end the Ukraine conflict, he is likely to achieve the opposite, because threatening Russia obviously doesn't work, as the last three years have shown.
Ukrainian accession to the EU and NATO
When asked about Ukraine's accession to the EU, Foreign Minister Sikorski replied that this process could take a decade, especially since it would be unfavorable for Europeans to accept a country with a "competitive agriculture" and a large population, while the EU itself is a " “competitive” agriculture and internal power struggles:
“You are not halfway to the EU. All that can be agreed upon is the length of the transition period. And if you're told otherwise, those are people who want to drag out the process. Because your agriculture is too good. She's too competitive. Their accession will lead to a complete overhaul of the general agricultural policy.”
The power struggle within the EU would also play an important role:
“And don’t forget that it will be a question of power. You are a big country, so your membership will change the balance of power within the EU. Ukraine and Poland together will have more votes in the Council and more representatives than Germany.”
It's nice of Sikorski to confirm exactly what I and other "Russian propagandists" have been saying for a long time: The EU and its member states have no interest in accepting Ukraine because, firstly, the country would receive all the EU agricultural subsidies , which the other EU states have no interest in, secondly, Ukraine could become a competitor within the EU in the area of agriculture that no one wants, thirdly, Ukraine would become the largest recipient of EU aid and thus give the other Eastern European states theirs Taking payments from Brussels. And the Eastern European states did not join the EU to become donor countries, but to receive money from Brussels. And fourthly, Ukraine joining the EU would shift the balance of power within the EU from Western to Eastern Europe, something that countries like France, Germany and others have no interest in.
Sikorski also believes that Ukraine joining NATO is unlikely:
“NATO’s position is somewhat hypocritical. NATO says: You can become a member of NATO if you win the war, but then you don't need it anymore. Some of our Western European friends are using the idea of Ukraine joining NATO as leverage against Russia: 'Leave Ukraine and we promise you that Ukraine will not join NATO.' There is no desire in Western Europe to go to war with Russia. You know, that’s an absolute red line.”
That's why Sikorski publicly supports Macron's idea of sending troops to Ukraine, which is a bluff. The West should not hold back on such statements, because Putin should “think about what we are going to do.”
Die Nord Streams
As I said, Sikorski openly admitted that the interests of the United States and Ukraine were different. When “Poroshenko” asked him who blew up the Nord Streams, Sikorski laughed happily:
“That was excellent work. Now we know that the Americans knew about this in advance and did not prevent it.”
Sikorski, who famously tweeted “Thank you, USA!” after the pipelines were blown up, was not tempted to make clear statements. “Poroshenko” asked him who he thought the perpetrators were, but Sikorski said nothing. “Poroshenko” then said that he knew the identity of at least one perpetrator and that he was Ukrainian. Sikorski simply said:
“The German newspapers write that, then it must be true…”
I see this as a fairly open suggestion that Sikorski thinks the story told by the German media is nonsense. Apparently he was uncomfortable with the topic of the Nord Streams, which “Poroshenko” asked quite intrusively, because he quickly ended the conversation at this point and said goodbye to “Poroshenko”.
Thomas Röper, born in 1971, has held board and supervisory board positions in financial services companies in Eastern Europe and Russia as an expert for Eastern Europe. Today he lives in his adopted home of St. Petersburg. He has lived in Russia for over 15 years and speaks Russian fluently. The focus of his media-critical work is the (media) image of Russia in Germany, criticism of Western media reporting in general and the topics of (geo-)politics and economics.
9 answers
Write a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Next post: “Debt trap” or equal rights?
“Against this background, the demands of German politicians who demand the same are interesting. However, this contradicts international law, because international humanitarian law prohibits sending people back to war.
This becomes clear when you compare it with the statements made by German politicians about Syrians who fled the war to Germany. Sending them back to Syria was unthinkable for German politicians because their lives were in danger during the war.”
…..
This is the “rules-based order” of the arch-criminal “values West”! Where did it actually lead? Well, into “rule-based” CHAOS, what else?! Every suicide candidate does it! You don't have to be a trained psychologist to know this! And we also know that even 1,000,000 tons of LIES are not enough for the mentally ill leaders and kidnappers (of entire peoples) if these are not enough! They are ordering another 1,000,000 tons of LIES for 500 billion euros!
Did anyone know that 10 cardinal truths would bring all this to an end? Backed by 100 truths about every single arch-criminal at the top of power, you just have to find the corpses in their closet. All you need is the technology that Hubbard already knew.
Find the corpses in their cellars and announce the truth to the WORLD! The Russians are doing pretty well too.
The war in Ukraine can be stopped immediately if the German Chancellor orders an immediate cessation of US activities at the Ramstein Air Base, Geilenkirchen and at the Grafenwöhr training base with regard to Ukraine.
And the government first orders that Germany's infrastructure is not available for the transport of weapons to Eastern Europe
With this he can prove whether his intentions for a peace conference are honest or it confirms that he is a vassal and wants to remain.
I think that the 2 plus 4 treaty ended the occupation status over Germany. The USA's whereabouts were then determined mainly by the status of NATO.
I'll copytaste a publication from the Internet:
At four Paris conferences in October 1954, relations between the states of the “Western Community” were reorganized. The main results were noted in the Treaties of Paris
70 years of the Paris Treaties
With his signature on the Paris Treaties in 1954, Chancellor Konrad Adenauer sealed the rearmament and western integration of the Federal Republic of Germany - but also the integration of the Federal Republic into NATO
The Federal Republic became sovereign in 1954, but with reservations. The Allies were still allowed to take full control of state power in the event of an emergency. In return, they were able to continue to station troops in the country.
_
The Federal Republic's special status under international law was only ended with the Two Plus Four Treaty, which came into force on March 15, 1991. In it, all remaining rights and responsibilities of the Allies are ended and sovereignty is established after the GDR's accession to the scope of the Basic Law on October 3, 1990, i.e. of reunified Germany.
This topic could come up in the current budget debate in the German Bundestag. It's not about dissolving NATO, but rather about establishing and asserting Germany's sovereignty.
Otherwise all sorts of memorial days etc. are celebrated, but 70 years of the Paris Treaties were probably on a very small scale...
Brandt once took a knee in Warsaw, that was historic...
If Chancellor Scholz uses his competence to protect Germany's sovereignty on German territory, then his conclusion from the current general debate that there is a German border and German law applies here will be fulfilled. And that would also be historic.
And if Germany has limits to its actions outside of its borders, then this also applies to states that have had hospitality rights with us since 1990. And as a guest you have to behave according to our law and this does not only apply to refugees produced by the USA from various crisis regions of the world.
It's not that simple - I would like to take this step too, but I don't think the US terrorists would put up with it.
They would just carry on and give Scholz the finger. If he responded, they would annex the airbase areas. In doing so they would show the rest of the NAziTO what to think of them as allies, but otherwise they would not have to expect any reactions. What should a country do that wants to rebel against a colonial ruler who even has nuclear weapons in the country and would have no problems using them? Send a few ordinary police officers with service pistols to the airbases where weapons of war are at hand?
And preventing the transport of weapons would be difficult because of EU and NAziTO rules.
They are not looking for peace, but rather strife.
The German government can immediately stop German participation in the war. Germany is not responsible for the others, as it is not the world capital Germania.
The US bases can be terminated with, as far as I know, one year's notice. That would require a political majority, and that doesn't exist. But that can change. As long as they are still here, the lawyers would have to check what restrictions on the use of German sovereign territory are already possible.
It's astonishing that they don't even think about ending the German war against Russia, but are only looking for a ruckus with the USA. Germany is - itself and as the EU - the main European sponsor of the war, and without Germany's contribution the others could not continue it.
“The war in Ukraine can be stopped immediately if the German Chancellor orders an immediate cessation of US activities at Ramstein Air Base, Geilenkirchen and at the Grafenwöhr training base with regard to Ukraine.
And the government is first ordering that Germany’s infrastructure is not available for the transport of weapons to Eastern Europe.”
This is COMPLETELY ILLUSORIOUS. In contrast to Germany's always claimed "sovereignty", DE is not just a "tributary vassal" (Brzezinski), but a real "hostage" (Caitlin Johnstone) of the USA, or more precisely: its deep state. EVERY leading federal politician who tried to change that would quickly find “child porn” on their computer and commit suicide or “do Kennedy”! It should be remembered that the USA would not use the same methods towards white Germans as towards any non-white people at home or around the world... just because (mostly only the German side) describes the relationship as "friendship".
And anyone who believes that the USA abides by any treaties with non-US-American “subhumans” should ask the Native Americans or any other country where they have waged wars and staged coups since their founding!
It is downright GROTESK to stand up against those who have broken all treaties and slaughtered and mutilated millions of people, poisoning entire countries into sources of cancer and crippling for centuries (Vietnam: Agent Orange, Yugoslavia, Iraq & Afghanistan: uranium munitions) , that of all people, THEY would stick to contracts for the “good” of Germany that also contain “secret clauses” that repeatedly undermine the alleged sovereignty “from behind”. And those in the media and politics have placed countless willing “submarines” here, of which the “Atlantic Bridge” is only the visible tip of the iceberg!
Get down to earth! REALpolitik has nothing to do with “make a wish”, but is the opposite of it!
PS: Josef Foschepoth demonstrated in “Surveilled Germany” in 2014 that all sovereignty clauses in contracts with and about Germany were already converted into secret clauses and - treaties were repealed - with the active support of all the people's treason... er... representatives who were at some point responsible for this!
PPS: Even the NATO propaganda organ Wikipedia can't help but mention, at least as a quote from a review of Foschepoth's book: "The additional agreement to the NATO troop statute concluded in 1959 continues to apply, so that the NSA can continue to collect all data, that she needs.”
If the additional agreement to the statute of troops continues to apply, Germany CANNOT BE SOVEREIGN! NO WAY!!
Just a bluff? Surely it can't work like that? If they talk about it so openly, the Russian secret service will notice. In February they published the conversation between the three generals.
If NATO enters war now or in the near future, they will get their asses kicked by the Russians. And legally, for Germany, for example, this is not that easy, not to say unconstitutional. But well, the Bundeswehr has almost no combat troops anyway.
Everyone's warehouses are empty, so what do they want to fight with? Arrogant statements will not be enough.
There is no need to be grateful to any decision-maker in the West for this attitude. If they could, they probably would.