1. Phiên bản ttvnol.com mới đã chính thức đi vào hoạt động. Trong quá trình sử dụng, nếu phát hiện các lỗi của phiên bản mới, mời mọi người thông báo tại đây.
  2. Các thành viên xem hướng dẫn sử dụng tính năng của diễn đàn tại đây.
  3. BQT xin thông báo: Hiện tại một số hệ thống dịch vụ của diễn đàn đang gặp sự cố. Chúng tôi đang nỗ lực khôi phục lại hệ thống trong thời gian sớm nhất. BQT thành thật xin lỗi các bạn vì sự bất tiện này.
  4. Tuyển Mod quản lý diễn đàn. Các thành viên xem chi tiết tại đây

Tình hình Ukraine và bóng ma của nội chiến

Chủ đề trong 'Kỹ thuật quân sự nước ngoài' bởi canhsatbienvietnam, 19/02/2014.

  1. 10 người đang xem box này (Thành viên: 3, Khách: 7):
  2. boy_co_don,
  3. tanphat987,
  4. Hieu_ba_gia
  1. warlockfawkes

    warlockfawkes Thành viên gắn bó với ttvnol.com

    Toàn văn buổi phỏng vấn anh Pu. Có thể thấy là ảnh hoàn toàn chẳng đồng tình gì sự trị vì của Yanukovich và ảnh cũng hiểu tâm trạng của người dân biểu tình ở Maidan. Tuy nhiên sau lưng những người này lại là 1 thế lực khác lợi dụng thao túng chính quyền.


    PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN: Good afternoon, colleagues,

    How shall we do this? This is what I’d like *****ggest: let’s have a conversation, rather than an interview. Therefore, I would ask you to begin by stating all your questions, I will jot them down and try to answer them, and then we will have a more detailed discussion of the specifics that interest you most.

    Let’s begin.

    QUESTION: Mr President, I would like to ask (you took a lengthy pause, so we have quite a few questions by now) how you assess the events in Kiev? Do you think that the Government and the Acting President, who are currently in power in Kiev, are legitimate? Are you ready to communicate with them, and on what terms? Do you yourself think it possible now to return to the agreements of February 21, which we all talk about so often?

    QUESTION: Mr President, Russia has promised financial aid to Crimea and instructions were issued to the Finance Ministry yesterday. Is there a clear understanding of how much we are giving, where the money is coming from, on what terms and when? The situation there is very difficult.

    QUESTION: When, on what terms and in what scope can military force be used in Ukraine? To what extent does this comply with Russia’s international agreements? Did the military exercises that have just finished have anything to do with the possible use of force?

    QUESTION: We would like to know more about Crimea. Do you think that the provocations are over or that there remains a threat to the Russian citizens who are now in Crimea and to the Russian-speaking population? What are the general dynamics there – is the situation changing for the better or for the worse? We are hearing different reports from there.

    QUESTION: If you do decide to use force, have you thought through all the possible risks for yourself, for the country and for the world: economic sanctions, weakened global security, a possible visa ban or greater isolation for Russia, as western politicians are demanding?

    QUESTION: Yesterday the Russian stock market fell sharply in response to the Federation Council’s vote, and the ruble exchange rates hit record lows. Did you expect such a reaction? What do you think are the possible consequences for the economy? Is there a need for any special measures now, and of what kind? For instance, do you think the Central Bank’s decision to shift to a floating ruble exchange rate may have been premature? Do you think it should be revoked?

    VLADIMIR PUTIN: Fine, let us stop here for now. I will begin, and then we will continue. Don’t worry; I will try to answer as many questions as possible.

    First of all, my assessment of what happened in Kiev and in Ukraine in general. There can only be one assessment: this was an anti-constitutional takeover, an armed seizure of power. Does anyone question this? Nobody does. There is a question here that neither I, nor my colleagues, with whom I have been discussing the situation in Ukraine a great deal over these past days, as you know – none of us can answer. The question is why was this done?

    I would like to draw your attention to the fact that President Yanukovych, through the mediation of the Foreign Ministers of three European countries – Poland, Germany and France – and in the presence of my representative (this was the Russian Human Rights Commissioner Vladimir Lukin) signed an agreement with the opposition on February 21. I would like to stress that under that agreement (I am not saying this was good or bad, just stating the fact) Mr Yanukovych actually handed over power. He agreed to all the opposition’s demands: he agreed to early parliamentary elections, to early presidential elections, and to return to the 2004 Constitution, as demanded by the opposition. He gave a positive response to our request, the request of western countries and, first of all, of the opposition not to use force. He did not issue a single illegal order to shoot at the poor demonstrators. Moreover, he issued orders to withdraw all police forces from the capital, and they complied. He went to Kharkov to attend an event, and as soon as he left, instead of releasing the occupied administrative buildings, they immediately occupied the President’s residence and the Government building – all that instead of acting on the agreement.

    I ask myself, what was the purpose of all this? I want to understand why this was done. He had in fact given up his power already, and as I believe, as I told him, he had no chance of being re-elected. Everybody agrees on this, everyone I have been speaking to on the telephone these past few days. What was the purpose of all those illegal, unconstitutional actions, why did they have to create this chaos in the country? Armed and masked militants are still roaming the streets of Kiev. This is a question to which there is no answer. Did they wish to humiliate someone and show their power? I think these actions are absolutely foolish. The result is the absolute opposite of what they expected, because their actions have significantly destabilised the east and southeast of Ukraine.

    Now over to how this situation came about.

    In my opinion, this revolutionary situation has been brewing for a long time, since the first days of Ukraine’s independence. The ordinary Ukrainian citizen, the ordinary guy suffered during the rule of Nicholas II, during the reign of Kuchma, and Yushchenko, and Yanukovych. Nothing or almost nothing has changed for the better. Corruption has reached dimensions that are unheard of here in Russia. Accumulation of wealth and social stratification – problems that are also acute in this country – are much worse in Ukraine, radically worse. Out there, they are beyond anything we can imagine imagination. Generally, people wanted change, but one should not support illegal change.

    Only use constitutional means should be used on the post-Soviet space, where political structures are still very fragile, and economies are still weak. Going beyond the constitutional field would always be a cardinal mistake in such a situation. Incidentally, I understand those people on Maidan, though I do not support this kind of turnover. I understand the people on Maidan who are calling for radical change rather than some cosmetic remodelling of power. Why are they demanding this? Because they have grown used to seeing one set of thieves being replaced by another. Moreover, the people in the regions do not even participate in forming their own regional governments. There was a period in this country when the President appointed regional leaders, but then the local Council had to approve them, while in Ukraine they are appointed directly. We have now moved on to elections, while they are nowhere near this. And they began appointing all sorts of oligarchs and billionaires to govern the eastern regions of the country. No wonder the people do not accept this, no wonder they think that as a result of dishonest privatisation (just as many people think here as well) people have become rich and now they also have all the power.

    For example, Mr Kolomoisky was appointed Governor of Dnepropetrovsk. This is a unique crook. He even managed to cheat our oligarch Roman Abramovich two or three years ago. Scammed him, as our intellectuals like to say. They signed some deal, Abramovich transferred several billion dollars, while this guy never delivered and pocketed the money. When I asked him [Abramovich]: “Why did you do it?” he said: “I never thought this was possible.” I do not know, by the way, if he ever got his money back and if the deal was closed. But this really did happen a couple of years ago. And now this crook is appointed Governor of Dnepropetrovsk. No wonder the people are dissatisfied. They were dissatisfied and will remain so if those who refer to themselves the legitimate authorities continue in the same fashion.

    Most importantly, people should have the right to determine their own future, that of their families and of their region, and to have equal participation in it. I would like to stress this: wherever a person lives, whatever part of the country, he or she should have the right to equal participation in determining the future of the country.

    Are the current authorities legitimate? The Parliament is partially, but all the others are not. The current Acting President is definitely not legitimate. There is only one legitimate President, from a legal standpoint. Clearly, he has no power. However, as I have already said, and will repeat: Yanukovych is the only undoubtedly legitimate President.

    There are three ways of removing a President under Ukrainian law: one is his death, the other is when he personally stands down, and the third is impeachment. The latter is a well-deliberated constitutional norm. It has to involve the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court and the Rada. This is a complicated and lengthy procedure. It was not carried out. Therefore, from a legal perspective this is an undisputed fact.

    Moreover, I think this may be why they disbanded the Constitutional Court, which runs counter to all legal norms of both Ukraine and Europe. They not only disbanded the Constitutional Court in an illegitimate fashion, but they also – just think about it – instructed the Prosecutor General’s Office to launch criminal proceedings against members of the Constitutional Court. What is that all about? Is this what they call free justice? How can you instruct anyone to start criminal proceedings? If a crime, a criminal offence, has been committed, the law enforcement agencies see this and react. But instructing them to file criminal charges is nonsense, it’s monkey business.

    Now about financial aid to Crimea. As you may know, we have decided to organise work in the Russian regions to aid Crimea, which has turned to us for humanitarian support. We will provide it, of course. I cannot say how much, when or how – the Government is working on this, by bringing together the regions bordering on Crimea, by providing ad***ional support to our regions so they could help the people in Crimea. We will do it, of course.

    Regarding the deployment of troops, the use of armed forces. So far, there is no need for it, but the possibility remains. I would like to say here that the military exercises we recently held had nothing to do with the events in Ukraine. This was pre-planned, but we did not disclose these plans, naturally, because this was a snap inspection of the forces’ combat readiness. We planned this a long time ago, the Defence Minister reported to me and I had the order ready to begin the exercise. As you may know, the exercises are over; I gave the order for the troops to return to their regular dislocations yesterday.

    What can serve as a reason to use the Armed Forces? Such a measure would certainly be the very last resort.

    First, the issue legitimacy. As you may know, we have a direct appeal from the incumbent and, as I said, legitimate President of Ukraine, Mr Yanukovych, asking us to use the Armed Forces to protect the lives, freedom and health of the citizens of Ukraine.

    What is our biggest concern? We see the rampage of reactionary forces, nationalist and anti-Semitic forces going on in certain parts of Ukraine, including Kiev. I am sure you, members of the media, saw how one of the governors was chained and handcuffed to something and they poured water over him, in the cold of winter. After that, by the way, he was locked up in a cellar and tortured. What is all this about? Is this democracy? Is this some manifestation of democracy? He was actually only recently appointed to this position, in December, I believe. Even if we accept that they are all corrupt there, he had barely had time to steal anything.

    And do you know what happened when they seized the Party of Regions building? There were no party members there at all at the time. Some two-three employees came out, one was an engineer, and he said to the attackers: “Could you let us go, and let the women out, please. I’m an engineer, I have nothing to do with politics.” He was shot right there in front of the crowd. Another employee was led to a cellar and then they threw Molotov ****tails at him and burned him alive. Is this also a manifestation of democracy?

    When we see this we understand what worries the citizens of Ukraine, both Russian and Ukrainian, and the Russian-speaking population in the eastern and southern regions of Ukraine. It is this uncontrolled crime that worries them. Therefore, if we see such uncontrolled crime spreading to the eastern regions of the country, and if the people ask us for help, while we already have the official request from the legitimate President, we retain the to use all available means to protect those people. We believe this would be absolutely legitimate. This is our last resort.

    Moreover, here is what I would like to say: we have always considered Ukraine not only a neighbour, but also a brotherly neighbouring republic, and will continue to do so. Our Armed Forces are comrades in arms, friends, many of whom know each other personally. I am certain, and I stress, I am certain that the Ukrainian military and the Russian military will not be facing each other, they will be on the same side in a fight.

    Incidentally, the things I am talking about – this unity – is what is happening in Crimea. You should note that, thank God, not a single gunshot has been fired there; there are no casualties, except for those crushed by the crowd about a week ago. What was going on there? People came, surrounded units of the armed forces and talked to them, convincing them to follow the demands and the will of the people living in that area. There was not a single armed conflict, not a single gunshot.

    Thus the tension in Crimea that was linked to the possibility of using our Armed Forces simply died down and there was no need to use them. The only thing we had to do, and we did it, was to enhance the defence of our military facilities because they were constantly receiving threats and we were aware of the armed nationalists moving in. We did this, it was the right thing to do and very timely. Therefore, I proceed from the idea that we will not have to do anything of the kind in eastern Ukraine.

    There is something I would like to stress, however. Obviously, what I am going to say now is not within my authority and we do not intend to interfere. However, we firmly believe that all citizens of Ukraine, I repeat, wherever they live, should be given the same equal right to participate in the life of their country and in determining its future.

    If I were in the shoes of those who consider themselves the legitimate authorities, I would not waste time and go through all the necessary procedures, because they do not have a national mandate to conduct the domestic, foreign and economic policy of Ukraine, and especially to determine its future.

    Now, the stock market. As you may know, the stock market was jumpy even before the situation in Ukraine deteriorated. This is primarily linked to the policy of the US Federal Reserve, whose recent decisions enhanced the attractiveness of investing in the US economy and investors began moving their funds from the developing markets to the American market. This is a general trend and it has nothing to do with Ukraine. I believe it was India that suffered most, as well as the other BRICS states. Russia was hit as well, not as hard as India, but it was. This is the fundamental reason.

    As for the events in Ukraine, politics always influence the stock market in one way or another. Money likes quiet, stability and calm. However, I think this is a tactical, temporary development and a temporary influence.

    Your questions, please.

    QUESTION: Mr President, can you tell us if you expected such a harsh reaction to Russia’s actions from your western partners? Could you give us any details of your conversations with your western partners? All we’ve heard was a report from the press service. And what do you think about the G8 summit in Sochi – will it take place?

    VLADIMIR PUTIN: Regarding the expected reaction, whether the G8 will meet and about the conversations. Our conversations are confidential, some are even held over secure lines. Therefore, I am not authorised to disclose what I discussed with my partners. I will, however, refer to some public statements made by my colleagues from the west; without giving any names, I will comment on them in a general sense.

    What do we pay attention to? We are often told our actions are illegitimate, but when I ask, “Do you think everything you do is legitimate?” they say “yes”. Then, I have to recall the actions of the United States in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, where they either acted without any UN sanctions or completely distorted the content of such resolutions, as was the case with Libya. There, as you may know, the resolution only spoke of closing the airspace for government aircraft, while it all ended with bomb attacks and special forces land operations.

    Our partners, especially in the United Sates, always clearly formulate their own geopolitical and state interests and follow them with persistence. Then, using the principle “You’re either with us or against us” they draw the whole world in. And those who do not join in get ‘beaten’ until they do.

    Our approach is different. We proceed from the conviction that we always act legitimately. I have personally always been an advocate of acting in compliance with international law. I would like to stress yet again that if we do make the decision, if I do decide to use the Armed Forces, this will be a legitimate decision in full compliance with both general norms of international law, since we have the appeal of the legitimate President, and with our commitments, which in this case coincide with our interests to protect the people with whom we have close historical, cultural and economic ties. Protecting these people is in our national interests. This is a humanitarian mission. We do not intend *****bjugate anyone or to dictate to anyone. However, we cannot remain indifferent if we see that they are being persecuted, destroyed and humiliated. However, I sincerely hope it never gets to that.

    QUESTION: How do you asses the reaction of the west to the events in Ukraine and their threats regarding Russia: are we facing the possibility of sanctions or withdrawal from the G8?

    VLADIMIR PUTIN: Regarding sanctions. It is primarily those who intend to apply them that need to consider their consequences. I believe that in the modern world, where everything is interconnected and interdependent, it is possible to cause damage to another country, but this will be mutual damage and one should bear this in mind. This is one thing.

    The second and the most important thing. I have already told you what motivates us. And what motivates our partners? They supported an unconstitutional armed take-over, declared these people legitimate and are trying *****pport them. By the way, despite all of this we have been patient and even ready to cooperate; we do not want to disrupt our cooperation. As you may know, a few days ago I instructed the Government to consider how we can maintain contacts even with those powers in Kiev that we do not consider legitimate in order to retain our ties in the economy and industry. We think our actions have been absolutely reasonable, while any threat against Russia is counterproductive and harmful.

    As for the G8, I do not know. We will be ready to host the summit with our colleagues. If they do not want to come – so be it.

    QUESTION: Can I add about contacts? The way I see it, you consider the Prime Minister of Crimea Mr Aksyonov to be a legitimate representative of government authorities. Are you ready to have any contacts with those who consider themselves the legitimate authorities in Kiev?

    VLADIMIR PUTIN: I have just spoken about it. You must have missed it.

    QUESTION: I mean, at the top level for a political solution.

    VLADIMIR PUTIN: I do not have a partner at the top level there. There is no president there, and there cannot be one until the general elections.

    As for Crimea, the Parliament there was formed in 2010, in December 2010 if I remember correctly. There are 100 MPs representing six political parties. After the previous Prime Minister resigned, the Crimean Parliament, in compliance with the existing legislation and procedures elected a new Prime Minister at a session of the Crimean Supreme Council. He is definitely legitimate. They have complied with all the procedures envisaged by the law; there is not a single violation. However, when a few days ago a group of armed men tried to occupy the building of the Crimean Supreme Soviet, this caused the concern of the local residents. It seemed as though someone wanted to apply the Kiev scenario in Crimea and to launch a series of terrorist attacks and cause chaos. Naturally, this causes grave concern among the local residents. That is why they set up self-defence committees and took control over all the armed forces.

    Incidentally, I was studying the brief yesterday to see what they took over – it is like a fortified zone. There are several dozen C-300 units, several dozen air-defence missile systems, 22,000 service members and a lot more. However, as I said, this is all in the hands of the people of Crimea and without a single gunshot.

    QUESTION: Mr President, a clarification if I may. The people who were blocking the Ukrainian Army units in Crimea were wearing uniforms that strongly resembled the Russian Army uniform. Were those Russian soldiers, Russian military?

    VLADIMIR PUTIN: Why don’t you take a look at the post-Soviet states. There are many uniforms there that are similar. You can go to a store and buy any kind of uniform.

    QUESTION: But were they Russian soldiers or not?

    VLADIMIR PUTIN: Those were local self-defence units.

    QUESTION: How well trained are they? If we compare them to the self-defence units in Kiev…

    VLADIMIR PUTIN: My dear colleague, look how well trained the people who operated in Kiev were. As we all know they were trained at special bases in neighbouring states: in Lithuania, Poland and in Ukraine itself too. They were trained by instructors for extended periods. They were divided into dozens and hundreds, their actions were coordinated, they had good communication systems. It was all like clockwork. Did you see them in action? They looked very professional, like special forces. Why do you think those in Crimea should be any worse?

    QUESTION: In that case, can I specify: did we take part in training Crimean self-defence forces?

    VLADIMIR PUTIN: No, we did not.

    QUESTION: How do you see the future of Crimea? Do you consider the possibility of it joining Russia?

    VLADIMIR PUTIN: No, we do not. Generally, I believe that only residents of a given country who have the freedom of will and are in complete safety can and should determine their future. If this right was granted to the Albanians in Kosovo, if this was made possible in many different parts of the world, then nobody has ruled out the right of nations to self-determination, which, as far as I know, is fixed by several UN documents. However, we will in no way provoke any such decision and will not breed such sentiments.

    I would like to stress that I believe only the people living in a given territory have the right to determine their own future.
  2. OnlySilverMoon

    OnlySilverMoon Thành viên gắn bó với ttvnol.com

    Lá cờ Soviet, lính tráng lại lôi nhau ra tranh luận, lại dùng từ "công dân", "anh em", ấy lại còn "Chú dám bắn vào lá cờ Soviet à?" nữa chứ. Cứ như cách mạng tháng 10 ấy nhở. :):):):)
    Mấy anh chính trị gia đĩ điếm Uk mà có tinh thần thế thì đã chả loạn! =))
    suhomang, michael1123leomc thích bài này.
  3. OnlySilverMoon

    OnlySilverMoon Thành viên gắn bó với ttvnol.com

    E dự là giờ U nhợn gì chắc chỉ có 2 con đường:
    1. Kiếm thằng lãnh đạo ngon ngon thân Nga, trở về vòng tay Gấu mẹ vĩ đại.
    2. Tách ra vài nước cộng hòa thân Nga, rồi ra sao thì ra.
    Đằng nào Nga cũng éo thiệt, còn nói chuyện tinh thần dân tộc ở nước nhiều chia rẽ như bọn U thì có lẽ ta nên áp dụng chuẩn Việt Nam, nhưng là vào thời nhà Lý :eek::eek::eek:
    Sẽ chẳng có bắn giết hay xâm lược gì ở đây đâu, tất cả sẽ ko rời khuôn khổ "lệ làng" trước giờ vẫn diễn. Mời các AQ cứ ngồi mơ bắn giết nhé :):):):)

    P/s Chị Lú ạ, cái tình anh em chúng nó khác nhau với ta Tàu có mỗi cái này thôi: Tình nghĩa chúng nó nợ nhau bằng máu, còn tinh nghĩa ta Tàu thì ăn thua nhau đổ máu. Chưa thằng lính Tàu nào thực sự chết vì cộng đồng người Việt, thì làm *** gì có tình anh em mà đi so với sánh. Bản chất chị đi *** đâu cũng chỉ ị một đống to để thể hiện chỗ này Lú ta đã đi qua, chứ chẳng mang tinh thần xây dựng *** gì. Dù sao cũng lừa đc khối chú ngây thơ, em cũng phải like cho một phong cách!
    HaNoiOld, dudu5, suhomang4 người khác thích bài này.
  4. bigradeon

    bigradeon Thành viên rất tích cực

    trong cái clip đó có đứa còn chửi nước Nga là chó cái, nước Mỹ bên cạnh chúng tao nữa.
    mấy chú Nga lập tức quây lại, 1 chú vác rpg chĩa sẵn, một chú nằm bò ra chống RPK hay gì đó.
    mấy thằng phóng viên theo thì bảo chúng tao đang live đấy :)
  5. OnlySilverMoon

    OnlySilverMoon Thành viên gắn bó với ttvnol.com

    Chắc bạn nhầm, bitch nó cũng như mình chửi thề bâng quơ thôi, ko có ý miệt thị gì đâu, còn cái câu nước Mĩ bên cạnh chúng tao vớ vẩn thằng dịch nó mớm vào lắm, éo biết đâu mà lần đc!
    Hai lão bộ đội già nói chuyện với nhau trên tinh thần xây dựng, kiểu hàng xóm lôi nhau ra nói lý lẽ thôi.
  6. bigradeon

    bigradeon Thành viên rất tích cực

    không phải bitch bác ah, mà nó nói tiếng Nga: Россия сука! Америка с нами!

    tất nhiên đây chỉ là dịch vui thôi, vì ngữ cảnh khi bọn U tiến đến bọn kia bắn chỉ thiên, mấy thằng đi đầu phản xạ hụp xuống, bọn đằng sau hơi cuống thôi
  7. VasilyTran

    VasilyTran Thành viên rất tích cực

    Hehe, bài này nổi tiếng mà The Sacred War-Священная война Svyashchennaya Voyna- Cuộc chiến vệ quốc thần thánh.
    suhomang thích bài này.
  8. OnlySilverMoon

    OnlySilverMoon Thành viên gắn bó với ttvnol.com

    Thấy Engsub dịch vậy, nhưng hai bộ đội già nói chuyện với nhau ngọt nhạt lắm phỏng? :rolleyes::rolleyes:
  9. TrungTuong

    TrungTuong Thành viên gắn bó với ttvnol.com

    Đại diện thường trực Nga tại Liên Hợp Quốc Vitaly Churkin: Hành động của Nga tại Ukraine là hoàn toàn thích đáng

    Photo: EPA
    Hành động của Nga ở Ukraine hoàn toàn thích đáng và hợp pháp. Đó là tuyên bố tại phiên họp khẩn cấp của Hội đồng Bảo an của đại diện thường trực Nga tại Liên Hợp Quốc Vitaly Churkin. Theo Hiệp định về Hạm đội Biển Đen, Nga có thể bố trí quân nhân của mình ở Crimea. Ông Churkin cũng cho rằng, để giải quyết tình trạng này cần phải thực hiện thoả thuận ngày 21 tháng 2, trong đó quy định Ukraine bắt đầu cải cách hiến pháp và thành lập chính phủ đoàn kết dân tộc. Trong khi đó, sự bất bình với chính phủ mới ở một số khu vực phía Nam và phía Đông Nam của Ukraine đang tăng lên. Crimea tiếp tục đấu tranh cho quyền tự chủ của mình. Đại diện một loạt thành phố đã bày tỏ mong muốn tham gia thành phần cộng hòa tự trị Crimea.
    Nga triệu tập một cuộc họp khẩn cấp của Hội đồng Bảo an Liên Hợp Quốc để nêu rõ quan điểm của mình về Ukraine. Đại diện thường trực của Nga tại Liên Hợp Quốc Vitaly Churkin cho biết, Viktor Yanukovych đã gửi thư cho tổng thống Vladimir Putin đề nghị "sử dụng lực lượng vũ trang Nga để khôi phục lại tính pháp luật ở Ukraine." Nga đang cố gắng để bảo vệ hàng triệu người Nga ở nước láng giềng Ukraine. Trong điều kiện hiện nay, hành động của Nga là hoàn toàn thích hợp và hợp pháp, ông Churkin nói và kêu gọi tất cả các đối tác thể hiện trách nhiệm.
    “Có những người đang âm mưu giải thích tình hình gần như là Nga gây hấn, họ đang đe dọa bằng tất cả các biện pháp trừng phạt và tẩy chay, họ chính là các đối tác của chúng tôi, là những người luôn luôn và liên tục khuyến khích các lực lượng chính trị gần gũi với họ đưa tối hậu thư và từ chối đối thoại, làm ngơ trước những mối quan tâm của phía Nam và phía Đông của Ukraina và hậu quả xã hội Ukraina bị phân rã. Chúng tôi kêu gọi thể hiện cách tiếp cận có trách nhiệm, đặt sang một bên các loại tính toán địa chính trị và đặt lợi ích của người dân Ukraina lên trên hết.”
    Hơn nữa, quyết định đưa quân vào lãnh thổ Ukraine vẫn chưa được đưa ra, và tình hình có thể được giải quyết nếu Kiev quay lại thoả thuận ngày 21 tháng 2, đã được ký kết giữa đại diện chính phủ và phe đối lập Ukraine, dưới sự chứng kiến của Bộ trưởng Ngoại giao Ba Lan, Pháp và Đức. Tài liệu này quy định bắt đầu cải cách hiến pháp và thành lập Chính phủ đoàn kết dân tộc. Phe đối lập không thực hiện những điều kiện này, và ngày hôm sau trong nước đã diễn ra sự thay đổi chính phủ bất hợp pháp. Theo đại diện thường trực của Nga tại EU Vladimir Chizhov, trong tuyên bố về Ukraine sau phiên họp bất thường của các ngoại trưởng EU, thỏa thuận này không được đề cập đến.
    Trong khi đó, trên thực tế Crimea và Sevastopol tiếp tục có những động thái độc lập nhiều hơn nữa. Chính quyền địa phương được kiểm soát bởi các cơ cấu quyền lực quan trọng, hôm qua hàng ngàn quân nhân Ukraina tuyên thệ trung thành với nhân dân Crimea. Theo dự định, vấn đề tình trạng nước cộng hòa sẽ được quyết định trong cuộc trưng cầu trưng ý vào cuối tháng này. Theo phó Chủ tịch Hội đồng tối cao Crimea Sergey Tsekov, đại diện chính quyền địa phương Kherson, Nikolayev và Odessa đã bày tỏ mong muốn gia nhập thành phần Crimea, nếu quyền hạn của nó được mở rộng. Nhà khoa học chính trị Leonid Savin khẳng định là dĩ nhiên, chính phủ Ukraina mới sẽ làm mọi thứ có thể để ngăn chặn điều này:
    “Tất nhiên, tôi nghĩ rằng chính phủ mới sẽ cản trở. Họ gọi nỗ lực tự quyết và tự quyết định vận mệnh của bản thân là ly khai và đe dọa sẽ truy tố hình sự. Tôi nghĩ rằng dự án liên minh có thể khả thi, để cho Crimea, vùng Donbass và Odessa tham gia, và thậm chí cả vùng Pridnestrovie sau này.”
    Như Bộ Ngoại giao Nga nêu rõ, Nga sẽ tiếp tục thảo luận với các đối tác quốc tế về Ukraine và tìm cách đưa tình hình ra khỏi cuộc khủng hoảng.
    suhomanghalosun thích bài này.
  10. TrungTuong

    TrungTuong Thành viên gắn bó với ttvnol.com

    Đúng là dân tình báo có khác, trả lời hợp lý...
    Ông Putin tuyên bố rằng phương Tây đã tiến hành ở Ukraina một cuộc thí nghiệm với những hậu quả không thể lường trước được

    Photo: RIA Novosti
    Các nước phương Tây đã biến đời sống chính trị ở Ukraina thành một trò hề, Tổng thống Nga Vladimir Putin tuyên bố với các nhà báo ở dinh thự Novo – Ogaryovo. Theo ông, điều tương tự đã xảy ra trong thời gian của cái gọi là “Cuộc Cách mạng Cam” năm 2004, khi chính ông Yanukovych không được lên nắm chính quyền.
    “Đôi khi tôi có cảm tưởng rằng ở bên kia, đằng sau một vũng nước lớn, có những nhân viên phòng thí nghiệm đang ngồi đâu đó ở Mỹ, và, như trên những con chuột, tiến hành những thí nghiệm nào đó mà không hiểu gì về hậu quả của những việc họ đang làm”,- ông Putin nói.
    Tổng thống Putin tuyên bố rằng Ukraina cần phải thông qua hiến pháp mới qua một cuộc trưng cầu dân ý. Đồng thời, Nga không công nhận kết quả các cuộc bầu cử tổng thống ở Ukraina nếu chúng sẽ được tổ chức trong tình hình hiện nay. Nói về số phận sau này của ông Yanukovych, ông Putin cho rằng nhân vật này không có tương lai chính trị. Đề cập đến động cơ bảo đảm an ninh cho nhà lãnh đạo bị thất sủng của Ukraina, Tổng thống Nga giải thích những mục tiêu nhân đạo là nguyên nhân của quyết định này.

Chia sẻ trang này