Obama reneges on U.S. Ukraine “Security Assurances” after giving up Nukes

Obama made it clear yesterday at his Presser, that he had no intention to honor the Security Assurances commitment made to Ukraine. In fact, he flew the doors wide open for Putin to march forward. If you want to know why Iran will never give up their Nuclear ambitions, this is a prime example. This is why we cannot be trusted. It was the United States, the United Kingdom and Russia that signed an accord with Ukraine and made a commitment to them, understood as “Security Assurances” in return for them to giving up their Nukes. So let us look back what was said just a few months ago when Putin marched into the Crimea Peninsula. Bet they sure wished they had those nukes now. They would still be a Sovereign Nation. Bet Saddam Hussein had managed to keep them. Same for Syria. The world would look much different now. So let’s take a look.

Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

The Presidents of Ukraine, Russian Federation and United States of America, and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom signed three memorandums (UN Document A/49/765) on December 5, 1994, with the accession of Ukraine to theTreaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Through this agreement, these countries (later to include China and France in individual statements) gave national security assurances to Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine. The Joint Declaration by the Russian Federation and the United States of America of December 4, 2009 confirmed their commitment.

“There are very clear legal obligations that are at risk,” U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said today in Paris.

Mar 5, 2014 4:34 PM

For a brief period, Ukraine was the world’s third-largest nuclear power.

It gave up thousands of nuclear warheads inherited from the Soviet Union in return for a 1994 promise from the U.S. and Russia not to use force or threaten military action against the newly independent nation, a pledge Russian President Vladimir Putin repudiated yesterday after his troops took control of Ukraine’s Crimea peninsula.

The 20-year-old Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, signed by the U.S., Russia, the U.K. and Ukraine, has moved to center stage in the standoff over the country’s Crimea region. Beyond the immediate crisis, Putin’s actions may have lasting consequences for future security talks, including efforts to further reduce U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals.

“There are very clear legal obligations that are at risk,” U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said today in Paris.

The U.S. says Putin violated the accord by sending forces into Crimea and threatening to intervene elsewhere in Ukraine to protect ethnic Russians.

The Budapest agreement was considered a major diplomatic accomplishment two decades ago, when the U.S. and Russia shared an interest in limiting the number of nuclear-armed states and reducing the risk that former Soviet weapons would fall into the wrong hands.

The dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991 left Ukraine with a large nuclear arsenal — about 1,900 strategic nuclear warheads designed to strike the U.S. and 2,500 shorter-range nuclear weapons.

In 1994, the country’s leaders agreed under pressure from Russia and the U.S. to give up all of them in return for a pledge to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty and territory. Ukraine completed the transfer of all its nuclear warheads to Russia in May 1996.

From Bloomberg March 2014

And boy did we shaft Qaddafi

 

In US-Libya Nuclear Deal, a Qaddafi Threat Faded Away

The cache of nuclear technology that Libya turned over to the United States, Britain and international nuclear inspectors in early 2004 was large — far larger than American intelligence experts had expected. There were more than 4,000 centrifuges for producing enriched uranium. There were blueprints for how to build a nuclear bomb — missing some critical components but good enough to get the work started.

The haul was so large that President Bush, with photographers in tow, flew to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee to celebrate a rare victory against nuclear proliferation. He briefly noted the success in his recent memoir, “Decision Points,” saying that with the surrender of the weapons Libya “resumed normal relations with the world.” Mr. Bush lifted restrictions on doing business with Libya and praised Colonel Qaddafi, saying his actions had “made our country and our world safer.

In Libya, the story was told differently. In an interview with The New York Times and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for a documentary, “Nuclear Jihad,” Seif Qaddafi complained that the West never followed through on many of its promises.

 Syria and Iraq.

Then we have Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Bet the wished they had finished their Nuclear ambitions. But Israel took care of business’

1981: Israel bombs Baghdad nuclear reactor – BBC News

The Israelis have bombed a French-built nuclear plant near Iraq’s capital, Baghdad, saying they believed it was designed to make nuclear weapons to destroy Israel.The Israeli Government explained its reasons for the attack in a statement saying: “The atomic bombs which that reactor was capable of producing whether from enriched uranium or from plutonium, would be of the Hiroshima size. Thus a mortal danger to the people of Israel progressively arose.”

It acted now because it believed the reactor would be completed shortly – either at the beginning of July or the beginning of September 1981.

The Israelis criticised the French and Italians for supplying Iraq with nuclear materials and pledged to defend their territory at all costs.

The Attack on Syria’s al-Kibar Nuclear Facility – inFocus

Israel’s September 6, 2007, attack on Syria’s al-Kibar nuclear facility surprised the world—Syria most of all. The operation, executed by the Israeli Air Force (IAF), was reminiscent of Israel’s 1981 attack on Iraq’s Osirak reactor, but with two noticeable differences. First, Israel remained silent following the al-Kibar bombing, while in 1981 it boasted publicly about the Iraq strike even before the pilots had returned. Second, whereas the international community knew of Saddam Hussein’s nuclear plans in 1981, few were aware of the extent of Syria’s nuclear program in 2007.

The IAF’s attack raises two important questions: What was Syria hiding? Why did Israel feel compelled to launch a military strike? Subsequent investigations have painted a clearer picture of what took place at al-Kibar.

Finally, we have Lerch. This was back in March when Crimea was taken over by Russia. No mention of the “Assurances Agreement” which was part of the Nonproliferation Treaty.

The Syrian policy makers, and the ‘Doing stupid stuff’ done in spades

By now most everyone has heard about the food fight going on between Hillary Clinton and Obama’s Syrian policy or lack thereof otherwise known as “doing stupid stuff”.  Hillary Clinton Slams Obama’s “Don’t Do Stupid Stuff” Foreign-Policy Mantra… shar.es/1noPFG  Something like that.Let’s take a look as Clinton’s keen insight morphs from Assad being a good guy to well, you know, she wishes to dispense with him as she took care of business in Libya and Egypt. But let me throw in a few more characters in this bizarre play that must have the world in absolute astonishment. Don’t miss the first Hillary clip!

Nancy Pelosi

In 2007, Nancy Pelosi, over strong objections from the  State Department, visited Syria, and said, “The road to Damascus is a road to  peace.” Senator John Kerry predicted that “Syria will change as it embraces a  legitimate relationship with the United States.” Read more:  Newsbusters

John Kerry

It wasn’t so long ago that Kerry made repeated pilgrimage to Syria, meeting with Assad five times between 2009 and 2011.

He famously used the adjective “generous” to describe Assad, as the Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens recalled in a column:

On March 16, 2011—the day after the first mass demonstration against the regime—John Kerry said Assad was a man of his word who had been “very generous with me.” He added that under Assad “Syria will move; Syria will change as it embraces a legitimate relationship with the United States.” This is the man who might be our next secretary of state.

As Michael Rubin recently wrote in Commentary Magazine, Kerry’s staffers described “their collective cringe when, after a motorcycle ride with Bashar al-Assad, he returned to Washington referring to Bashar as ‘my dear friend.’”

The National Review detailed more about Kerry’s positive impression of Assad:

After a “long and comprehensive” meeting with Assad in April of that year, Kerry described it as “a very positive discussion.” A month later, Kerry was back in Syria. His spokesman, insisting that “Syria can play a critical role in bringing peace and stability if it makes the strategic decision to do so,” asserted that Kerry had “emerged as one of the primary American interlocutors with the Syrian government.” Despite the senator’s interlocutions, Assad, it appears, has made the wrong “strategic decision.”

The Washington Free Beacon in an article titled “An Affair to Remember: John Kerry Hearts Bashar al-Assad” called Kerry the Syrian dictator’s “highest-ranking apologist in American politics”:

Hillary Clinton and her various changing views on Assad.

At this point, Madame Secretary believes that Bashar al- Assad is the good guy. That was in 2011.

Reporters aren’t interested in exploring aspects of Clinton’s job as Secretary  of State. One such comment not getting attention is her 2011 labeling of Bashar  al-Assad, the man almost  certainly (maybe) behind a devastating chemical weapons attack, as a “reformer.”

On the March 27, 2011, Clinton insisted, “There’s a different leader in  Syria now. Many of the members of Congress of both parties who have gone to  Syria in recent months have said they believe he’s a reformer.” (The Washington  Post gave this remark three Pinocchios. Clinton later backtracked.)  Yet, ABC, NBC and CBS have not reexamined the comments in the wake of the attack  or its accuracy.

Uploaded on Mar 31, 2011. Included in the clip is her take on the wonders of the administration’s actions in Libya as well. 

Here are the notes from the clip below, her view takes quite a turn!

Published on Jan 1, 2013 – A SURPRISE at the ending of the clip.

Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, has been calling over and over since 2011 for the legitimate president of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, to leave power and to let a bunch of al-Qaeda supporters known as the Syrian National Council (later Syrian National Coalition) replace him. However, the repeated defeats in battles of her “Free Syrian Army” (FSA) and their al-Qaeda Jihadi assistants have caused her much frustration culminating in a blood clot behind her ear. She will be replaced this month by John Kerry.

 

 

Leon Panetta

Back in August of 2012, former U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta says that when Bashar al-Assad loses his grip on power, he wants the Syrian military to remain in place. I am sure Kerry no doubt has an even happier ending.

Delusional Panetta wants Syrian Military to stay, S. Power confused

Depraved and Delusional formerUS Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta tells CNN that the US must make sure that the ruthless genocidal hated Baathist Alawite sect-packed Secret Police Security Forces stay in power after the inevitable overthrow of Dictator Bashar Assad.

Many of us have been looking for what the ending would be in Syria after we dispatched another head of a Middle East country. I happened on a Panetta video whose is equally clueless regarding the administration’s best wishes for a happy ending.

 

 

John Brennan (who now leads the CIA) has previously defended jihad as a “legitimate tenet of Islam.”

On June 29, 2011, John Brennan, who was then a senior adviser to the president and is currently the CIA director, explained the Obama administration’s counterterrorism strategy.

“Our strategy is…shaped by a deeper understanding of al Qaeda’s goals, strategy, and tactics,” Brennan claimed. “I’m not talking about al Qaeda’s grandiose vision of global domination through a violent Islamic caliphate. That vision is absurd, and we are not going to organize our counterterrorism policies against a feckless delusion that is never going to happen. We are not going to elevate these thugs and their murderous aspirations into something larger than they are.”

Keep reading…

Bonus info!

CIA sending guns to Syrian rebels via Muslim Brotherhood

Yesterday, the Turkish media reported, “Turkey … agreed with the US on a deal involving the transfer of US-engineered unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) that could prove crucial in combating terrorism.” The Predator drones, expected to be delivered in June 2012, are supposed to help the Turks combat terrorists, which in Ankara’s narrow definition means the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) crossing into Turkey from the Iraq border.Weekly Standard

Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are allegedly paying for weapons sent to Syrian opposition rebels through CIA operatives working on Turkish soil, the New York Times has reported

Liz Cheney, Elizabeth O’Bagy, Military contractors- a toxic brew an interesting post, if one enjoys the weeds.

This is Moustafa.

And look,

John McCain there in the middle, and a couple of Islamist kidnappers behind him.

setf-mouaz-mccain

Moustafa and O’Bagy arranged McCain’s trip to Syria through the Syrian Emergency Task Force.

You probably have guessed where this is going by now. Mr. Moustafa is a Palestinian Arab, and was involved in the Libya war before he turned up in Syria. He openly hates Israel. He opposed the overthrow of Mohammed Morsi in Egypt.

John Kerry back to his old habits – ‘whichever way the wind blows’ on Israel

I had this visual of Kerry out there windsurfing. If only he could get back in that particular groove and stay home. I bring you two clips. The first was the fine ad at the time Lurch thought he should be President. Then a clip of him with his smug attitude that all he needed to do was hop in his plane and the world would fall at his feet and say, but of course John Kerry. Meanwhile he throws Israel under the bus.

Kerry’s Big Blunder Supporting Hamas Terrorists

By turning to Turkey and Qatar, Kerry also enhanced their position in the regional power game. That’s contrary to the interests and desires of the United States’ traditional allies, such as Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the moderate Palestinian camp headed by Abbas.

Secretary of State John Kerry has made a significant mistake in how he’s pursuing a Gaza cease-fire — and it’s not surprising that he has upset both the Israelis and some moderate Palestinians.

Kerry’s error has been to put so much emphasis on achieving a quick halt to the bloodshed that he has solidified the role of Hamas, the intractable, unpopular Islamist group that leads Gaza, along with the two hard-line Islamist nations that are its key supporters, Qatar and Turkey. In the process, he has undercut not simply the Israelis but also the Egyptians and the Fatah movement that runs the Palestinian Authority, all of which want to see an end to Hamas rule in Gaza.

 

WASHINGTON  — The Obama administration pushed back strongly Monday at a torrent of Israeli criticism over Secretary of State John Kerry’s latest bid to secure a cease-fire with Hamas, accusing some in Israel of launching a “misinformation campaign” against the top American diplomat.

“It’s simply not the way partners and allies treat each other,” State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.

Her comments were echoed by the White House, where National Security Adviser Susan Rice said the U.S. was “dismayed” by mischaracterizations of Kerry’s efforts. Israeli media reports have cast Kerry as seeking a cease-fire that is more favorable to Hamas and being dismissive of key Israeli concerns.

- See more at: North Jersey

If only Kerry would stay home and let Israel take care of business. Arrogant little man who knows nothing.

U.N. returns Bombs found to terrorists, Kerry rewards Palestine with our bucks

Here we have the latest from one of the “valley Girls” Marie Harf, State Department spokesperson. Bottom line, Lurch AKA John Kerry hands out our bucks to the same agency that is returning rockets it found in Palestine schools back to the terrorists, but not to worry, Lurch managed to fly into Israel even though the FAA banned flights. So the squeeze is on. Israel can’t last long without the airport open, and apparently we will help fill the coffers of Hamas. UNRWA arms the terrorists. The screws tighten on Israel.

WASHINGTON — The State Department defended Secretary of State John Kerry’s decision to grant $15 million in humanitarian aid to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNWRA), even as the organization confirmed the discovery of additional rockets stored in one of its Gaza schools. Critics in Washington, however, blasted the secretary’s decision to include UNRWA as a recipient of part of a $47 million humanitarian package designed to aid Gazan civilians. [...]

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior official at a Washington pro-Israel organization described the announcement of funding for UNRWA as “a bewildering decision.” UNRWA announced last week an effort to raise $60 million in emergency aid to Gaza, one-quarter of which would be covered by the US contribution.

“UNRWA is objectively on the side of Hamas,” the official argued. “They give Hamas money, they do press work on behalf of Hamas, and as of this week they’re literally arming Hamas. Our Arab and Israeli allies all want Hamas and its supporters weakened. It’s very strange that the State Department would rush in, right when we’re asking the region to trust us on Iran, and functionally throw money at a terror organization that Iran has done so much to build up over the years.”

But State Department Deputy Spokeswoman Marie Harf said that the organization was a legitimate recipient for US aid, arguing that “it is an important organization.”

 

“So you don’t — you don’t believe that this amounts to aiding and abetting of” Hamas, a reporter asked.

“I would certainly not say that,” Harf said.

UNRWA maintains that it handed the missiles over to “local authorities” in Gaza that were not affiliated with Hamas. However, this is unlikely since the terror group is in control of all forces in Gaza.

Published on Jul 22, 2014

State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf defended a United Nations agency that was caught giving Hamas rockets back to the terror group on two separate occasions after they were discovered in the agency’s schools in Gaza.

The U.N.’s Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which operates several schools in Gaza, admitted earlier this week that it had found Hamas rockets stored in two of its schools. On both occasions, UNRWA gave the rockets over to local authorities, who is most cases operate in tandem with Hamas.

The incident has drawn fierce backlash from international observers, though Foggy Bottom sought Tuesday to deflect blame from UNRWA.

(The rest of the transcript can be found over at the You Tube location.)

Kerry on ‘hot mike’, blasts Israel and thinks he can change the world

If we thought Obama and his narcissistic behavior was over the top, we now have Kerry emulating his master. Anyone who caught the interview on Fox with this smug, arrogant man can only wonder who does he think he is? He apparently thinks he can snap his fingers, get on a plane and the world gets down on bended knee to another “great one.” Israel must really be feeling secure these days.

Published on Jul 20, 2014

Kerry: “It’s a hell of a pinpoint operation. It’s a hell of a pinpoint operation.”

 

 

Are Kerry and Obama doing to Israel what was done to Egypt and Libya?

Rocket attacks on Tel Aviv screams the headline on Drudge.

Little coverage is being given to the Israel Palestinian conflict, with Jerusalem itself under attack. Has Obama/Kerry given the green light to Palestine for these attacks? At the least fueling the flames as they did in Egypt and Libya? I think so. I am including  just a couple of links to what Obama’s henchmen are doing. But first, let me remind my readers, that we have Iranian born Valerie Jarrett who still has friends over there, and more importantly Kerry’s wife’s family is living in Iran. In fact, he had no business even being considered for Secretary of State. Let me first give this reminder:

Is Kerry being blackmailed with his Iranian family ties?/  November 27, 2013 — bunkerville

But what if the regime simply decides to round-up Nahed’s family members and torture them? Or sends its goons to visit them at home? Or exerts some form of more subtle pressure on them that gets no publicity, and then makes it known they want the United States to release Iranians jailed in the United States on terrorism charges or for attempting to procure weapons technology or military spare parts”?

His daughter has married an Iranian-American who has extensive family ties to Iran.

“I am proud of the Iranian-Americans in my own family, and grateful for how they have enriched my life,” Kerry said in the official statement. Kerry also said he was “strongly committed to resolving” the differences between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran, “to the mutual benefit of both of our people.”

Since its inception, the FBI has vetted U.S. government officials involved in national security issues, and it generally won’t grant clearances to individuals who are married to nationals of an enemy nation or have family members living in that country, for fear of divided loyalties or, more simply, blackmail.

Kerry has repeatedly appeared with groups such as the American Iranian Council (AIC), and has taken money from Iranian-Americans for his political campaigns.

Now back to Kerry’s latest rant against Israel

TEL AVIV – Secretary of State John Kerry’s rhetoric may have signaled to the Palestinian leadership that in the absence of negotiations with Israel, it is legitimate to launch a violent uprising, or intifada, against the Jewish state.

He continued: “I believe that if we do not resolve the issues between Palestinians and Israelis; if we do not find a way to find peace, there will be an increasing isolation of Israel. There will be an increasing campaign of delegitimization of Israel that’s taking place on an international basis.

Such apparent acceptance gives an air of legitimacy to a violent Palestinian campaign. It’s as if Kerry is gesturing to the Palestinians that they can use terror and riot tactics after the collapse of negotiations.

More at Kerry signaled OK to Palestinian Intifada 

Then we have

Top Obama official blasts Israel for dehumanizing Palestinians by denying the,sovereignty with military control

In an unusually harsh major foreign policy address, Philip Gordon, a special assistant to US President Barack Obama and the White House coordinator for the Middle East, appealed to Israeli and Palestinian leaders to make the compromises needed to reach a permanent peace agreement.

Jerusalem “should not take for granted the opportunity to negotiate” such a treaty with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who has proven to be a reliable partner, Gordon said.During the same speech he heaped praise on Mahmoud Abbas as being “committed to non-violence and co-existence and cooperation with Israel” while hammering Netanyahu for not caving in to unreasonable demands made by the Palestinians.

Times of Israel

While it may not have been his intention, Kerry’s statements seem to accept as a fait accompli that the Palestinian alternative to negotiations is the resumption of violence as a policy. His comments were not followed by any qualifier. He gave no indication that the Palestinian leadership would pay a political price for following the path of so-called resistance.

Such apparent acceptance gives an air of legitimacy to a violent Palestinian campaign. It’s as if Kerry is gesturing to the Palestinians that they can use terror and riot tactics after the collapse of negotiations.

Clinton refused to call Boko Haram a terrorist group even after threatening our ambassador

Shades of Benghazi. Hillary got lucky on this one. Stevens wasn’t so lucky. Better yet? The U.S.  accused Nigeria of war crimes in going after Boko Haram. Now we learn that we were fine in having our Ambassador to Nigeria threatened without a response. Does anyone really wonder anymore why we are so disrespected and the world is winding up in a free for all?

Secretary of State John Kerry says he has “credible evidence” that Nigeria has committed “human rights violations” in retaliating against the Islamists.

Daily Mail :

Boko Haram vowed in February 2012 to assassinate Ambassador Terence McCulley if the U.S. helped Nigeria with terror-fighting efforts
‘We know his house … We know his vehicle and the time he leaves his house and the time he returns,’ the group said in a communique to media
The warning was similar to Ansar al-Shariah’s pledge to kill U.S. officials in Benghazi, Libya, three months before the deadly 2012 terror attack there
Despite clear threats, Hillary Clinton’s State Department fought efforts to officially designate the mass-murdering Nigerians as a terrorist group
A former State Dept. official said naming new terror groups ‘sent the wrong message’ about al-Qaeda and its allies as Barack Obama ran for re-election

Boko Haram, the African Islamist terror group whose April kidnapping of nearly 300 young girls has united the civilized world in anger, promised to assassinate U.S. ambassador to Nigeria Terence McCulley in February 2012, vowing to murder him if America signed a terrorism-fighting Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) with the government in Abuja.

McCulley, now the U.S. ambassador to Ivory Coast, was not harmed. But the threat, coming amid a years-long bombing campaign that killed more than 1,400 Nigerian civilians, didn’t move then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to fast-track the addition of Boko Haram to the U.S. government’s official list of international terrorist groups.

Independent media outlets inside Nigeria first reported on February 9, 2012 that an unnamed Boko Haram leader issued a statement promising that ‘we will murder the U.S. Ambassador if the MOU is signed.’

The revelation provides a stark parallel with assassination warnings issued by Islamist groups in Benghazi, Libya in the months before the September 11, 2012 attack that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other American personnel.

Keep reading Daily Mail

Earlier post:

U.S. urged restraint earlier in striking back at Boko Haram

On May 18, 2013 Nigerian war planes “struck militant camps in the northeast” in an attempt to stem the growing tide of Islamic terrorists in the area. The U.S. quickly warned that Nigeria needs to be sure “to respect human rights and not harm civilians.”

Reuters reports that Nigerian troops used “jets and helicopters to bombard targets in their biggest offensive since the Boko Haram group launched a revolt almost four years ago.”

But three days after President Goodluck Jonathan declared a state of emergency in the northeast, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry issued a strongly worded statement saying: “We are … deeply concerned by credible allegations that Nigerian security forces are committing gross human rights violations, which, in turn, only escalate the violence and fuel extremism.”

The situation in northeast Nigeria has become so bad that President Goodluck Jonathan declared a state of emergency there days ago.

Since that time, as Nigeria has used jets and helicopters to try to rein the Islamists in, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry says he has “credible evidence” that Nigeria has committed “human rights violations” in retaliating against the Islamists.

Kerry said he condemns “Boko Haram’s campaign of terror in the strongest terms,” but he wants Nigeria to show “restraint” in their response.

Here is another wizard from the State Department:

“ I want to take this opportunity to stress one key point and that is that religion is not driving extremist violence either in Jos, or northern Nigeria,” Assistant Secretary of State Carson said Monday at a forum on U.S. policy toward Nigeria held at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C. ED.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 755 other followers

%d bloggers like this: