‘I can take Kiev in two weeks if I want’

Putin on 29 August, the day he spoke to Barroso. [Kremlin]

Said : Vladimir Putin, according to a number of media reports appearing with this quote claimed to be originally published by the Italian daily La Reppublica. 

According to a European news website 'EurActiv' : "La Reppublica has published what appears to be the account of Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, of an exchange held at the 30-31 August EU summit. Commission President José Manuel Barroso is reported to have told EU leaders that Vladimir Putin had informed him that he could take Kyiv in two weeks if he wanted. The exchange, according to La Reppublica, took place after Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko left the summit table, having made a dramatic account of the situation in his country.

José Manuel Barroso

Meanwhile, the outgoing European Commission President Barroso, breaking his silence, shared what Putin told him over their last telephone conversation, held on 29 August. According to EurActiv, Barroso said he held Putin accountable for the military action of the separatists in Ukraine. At this point, Putin erupted: “The issue is not this. If I want, I can take Kiev in two weeks,” he is reported to have said.

A Kremlin foreign policy aide, Yuri Ushakov, commenting on Putin’s statement didn’t deny that Putin had said the Russian army could capture Kyiv within two weeks, but said the words were “taken out of context” and had a totally different meaning," reported EurActiv.

“I want to remind you that Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear nations. This is a reality, not just words.” : Putin had warned a few days ago.

European leaders have already expressed their fears that the next target of Russia after Ukraine could be EU members Lithuania or Estonia. 

China's GDP is five times that of India's. Mutual trust between Beijing and New Delhi, facing strategic pressure from the north, is difficult to build as there is also an unresolved border conflict between the two.

Said : The Global Times in its OP-ED of today. The Global Times is owned by The People's Daily, an official newspaper of the government of China.

Modi delivering his Keynote Address

The editorial titled "Modi-Abe intimacy brings scant comfort" makes note of Modi's remarks that "Japan and India should strengthen strategic cooperation to promote peace and prosperity in Asia and meanwhile counter an expansionist mind-set," as clearly directed at China without naming it. But the editorial describes Modi's statement as 'predictable' for creating the media hype required to be in tune with India's national interests.

"Everywhere around us, we see an 18th century expansionist mind-set: encroaching on another country, intruding in others' waters, invading other countries and capturing territory," Modi said in a speech to business leaders in Tokyo.

Modi, in his Keynote Address at the Business Luncheon in Tokyo yesterday said India would follow developmental policies (and NOT expansionist policies) in partnership with Japan. The statement is being seen as an indirect snub to China and also Russia for their territorial ambitions without naming them.

"Everywhere around us, we see an 18th century expansionist mind-set : encroaching on another country, intruding in others' waters, invading other countries and capturing territory."

In order to show that Beijing has taken Modi's statement in a good spirit, the Global Times editorial argues that rationally, policy and strategy of a big country are shaped by its national interests and "India has proved it is a rational country, displaying an independent foreign policy and loathing being an appendix of any particular power." The editorial goes on to say : "Plus, India cherishes peace. The consensus between China and India has become stronger over not letting border issues shadow a bilateral relationship. The positive India-China relationship has also created conditions for rapport between India and Pakistan."

The editorial, however, has some rough and tough words also in response to Modi's speech which have to be taken into account in their real perspective.

Acknowledging that the Mutual trust between China and India was difficult to build it noted : "China's GDP is five times that of India's. Mutual trust between Beijing and New Delhi, facing strategic pressure from the north, is difficult to build as there is also an unresolved border conflict between the two."

Undermining the new Indo-Japan partnership, the OP-ED says : "The increasing intimacy between Tokyo and New Delhi will bring at most psychological comfort to the two countries. What is involved in China-India relations denotes much more than the display of the blossoming personal friendship between Modi and Abe. After all, Japan is located far from India. Abe's harangue on the Indo-Pacific concept makes Indians comfortable. It is South Asia where New Delhi has to make its presence felt. However, China is a neighbor it can't move away from. Sino-Indian ties can in no way be counterbalanced by the Japan-India friendship."

The editorial opines that the geopolitical competition is not the most important thing for China and India, at least at present because of the fact that both are new emerging countries and members of BRICS and have plenty of common interests.

The OP-ED ends with a sweet-n-sour conclusion : "China-India relations are stable. Chinese President Xi Jinping will pay a state visit to India later this month and the only country Chinese leaders won't visit in the near future is Japan. If Japan attempts to form a united front centered on India, it will be a crazy fantasy generated by Tokyo's anxiety of facing a rising Beijing."

Watch Narendra Modi's Full speech (In Hindi)

Japan has no option but to fuel inflation

Said : Fumio Nakakubo, Chief investment officer for Japan at UBS AG’s wealth management division, according to a Bloomberg news report. 

"Japan's economic position is like a person with a debt burden of $1.2 million who is spending all his $53,000 salary and still borrowing $40,000 a year."

"The yen must drop to about 120 per dollar to spark the increases in consumer prices needed to reduce Japan’s debt load. Japan has no option but to fuel inflation (not hyperinflation) to reduce its borrowings. No matter how much we pump up the economy, that alone probably won’t be enough, so we have to weaken the yen. There is no other way."

The above opinion was expressed by Fumio, as per the news report.

“Even countries that criticize us, when the chips are down, they know who to call”

Said : President Obama at the American Legion’s National Convention in Charlotte, N.C. today. He told veterans that airstrikes against ISIS must be part of a broader strategy. 

Obama speaking at the American Legion’s 96th Annual National Convention
(Photo by Lucas Carter:Source)

According to ABC News, Obama approved U.S military surveillance flights over Syria to track the Islamic militant group ISIS. Obama warned ISIS that the killers of American journalist James Foley will be hunted down. Foley was beheaded allegedly in retaliation for the U.S. air campaign, and after a $100 million ransom demand was rebuffed.

“Our message to anyone who harms our people is simple. America does not forget, our reach is long, we are patient, justice will be done,” he said. “We have proved time and time again we will do what’s necessary to capture those who harm Americans -- to go after those who harm Americans. And we’ll continue to take direct action where needed to protect our people and to defend our homeland.” 

Clinton "will be very formidable" but "beatable."

Said : Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican vice presidential nominee in 2012, reported CNN in today's story "Obama 'third term' label concerns some with Clinton ties" by Dan Merica quoting Ryan's interview with USA Today.

"I think she is beatable because the record is not very good," Ryan said in an interview with USA Today. "I don't think people are going to want to have an Obama third term and no matter how she tries to shake that label, she won't be able to," said Ryan.

It is widely being believed that if Clinton runs and gets elected then her presidency would be nothing more than President Barack Obama's third term. CNN quoted Clinton's friend and a former aide as saying that the best way to go after Clinton was to use this against her : "If you like Obama, you will love Hillary."

"She was in his government, she was at his side," said the source. "That is, the way to go after her is four more years of the same old thing. The question they should ask her is 'Tell me 10 things that you disagree with him on.'

Adrienne Elrod

The "third-term Obama" question is expected to become a hot issue. Republicans would want voters to think Obama and a third term, not the third term of Bill Clinton who is still more popular.

However, defending Clinton strongly, Adrienne Elrod - spokeswoman of Correct the Record, a pro-Clinton communication and rapid response group launched last year in November - said : "As a leading voice in the Republican 'do nothing' Congress, Paul Ryan is the last person who should be dishing out political advice. Hillary Clinton is one of the most admired and trusted public figures in America and should she run for President, she will run on her own record and implement her own vision for moving our country forward," reported CNN.

Adrienne Elrod : I've taken a new position with Correct the Record, a new effort to push back against negative misinformation aimed at potential 2016 presidential candidates.

In June, shortly after Clinton's memoir "Hard Choices" hit bookshelves, the Republican National Committee released a video with the Web ad flashing a simple message : "Hillary, Obama's Third Term."

In 2014, the world is more unpredictable than ever....

Said : United Kingdom Prime Minister David Cameron in a letter to NATO leaders today. 

In his letter, ahead of NATO Summit Wales 2014, Cameron has called for new NATO Armed Forces Charter and review of NATO-Russia long term relationship, according to a news release from his office. According to this release, the Prime Minister has set out 5 goals for the summit.

NATO’s long term relationship with Russia

The Prime Minister argues that leaders must review NATO’s long term relationship with Russia at the summit in response to Russia’s illegal actions in Ukraine. And the PM wants to use the summit to agree how NATO will sustain a robust presence in Eastern Europe in the coming months to provide reassurance to allies there, building on work already underway in NATO. The Prime Minister will hear more about these plans when he visits the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) with the NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen on Monday. They will meet with the Supreme Allied Commander Europe - General Philip Breedlove - to discuss plans to strengthen NATO’s ability to respond swiftly to any threat against any member of the alliance.

North Atlantic Armed Forces Charter

The Prime Minister has also proposed a landmark North Atlantic Armed Forces Charter that would build on the UK’s Military Covenant, demonstrating a collective commitment to our armed forces. This would be accompanied by work to share best practice on the provision of medical care and support for injured service personnel and bereaved families.

Afghanistan, changing threats and a global security network

The PM’s 3 other goals for the summit focus on:

Afghanistan: to discuss how the Alliance can support the Afghan government in the years ahead, particularly through the proposed resolute support mission and the financial sustainment of Afghan forces.

Changing threats – to ensure that NATO continues to evolve so it can address the different threats posed by fragile states, in particular by offering defence capacity building missions for other countries in the world and by encouraging those members that do not currently meet the 2% target for defence spending to invest more in their defence capabilities.

A global security network – the PM wants to use the summit to demonstrate a clear commitment to working with others who share our values and NATO’s role in maintaining an international rules-based order that promotes freedom, democracy and the rule of law. In that context, 33 partner countries have been invited to the summit and representatives from at least 3 international organisations are expected to attend.

Full text of the PM’s letter to leaders from NATO’s member states

With less than 6 weeks to go until the NATO Summit I wanted to write to you personally to set out what I hope we can achieve, building on the ideas already put forward by Secretary-General Rasmussen.

This will be the first NATO Summit in the United Kingdom since Margaret Thatcher hosted the London Summit in 1990, just as the Cold War was ending. That summit proved a turning point for the alliance as leaders charted a new course for NATO and for a Europe “whole, free and at peace”.

In 2014, the world is more unpredictable than ever and we meet at another pivotal moment in the history of the alliance. In Afghanistan, our combat mission is coming to an end. To the East, Russia has ripped up the rulebook with its illegal annexation of Crimea and aggressive destabilisation of Ukraine. To the South, an arc of instability spreads from North Africa and the Sahel, to Syria, Iraq and the wider Middle East. So we must use the summit to agree how NATO should adapt to respond to and deter such threats; and to ensure the continued collective defence of all its members. We should have 5 goals.

First, 6 months into the Russia-Ukraine crisis we must agree on long-term measures to strengthen our ability to respond quickly to any threat, to reassure those allies who fear for their own country’s security and to deter any Russian aggression. All NATO allies have already contributed to the alliance’s response to this crisis and we should agree how we can sustain a robust presence in Eastern Europe, consistent with the NATO Russia Founding Act, to make clear to Russia that neither NATO nor its members will be intimidated. We should agree specific actions including: a new exercise schedule adapted to the new security environment; the necessary infrastructure; pre-positioning of equipment and supplies; and an enhanced NATO Response Force. This should be part of a broader action plan that enables us to respond more quickly to any threat against any member of the alliance, including when we have little warning.

We must also review our long term relationship with Russia. While NATO has only ever sought to be a partner to Russia, not a threat, it is clear that Russia views NATO as an adversary. We must accept that the co-operation of recent years is not currently possible because of Russia’s own illegal actions in NATO’s neighbourhood and revisit the principles that guide our relationship with Russia.

Second, as the ISAF mission in Afghanistan draws to an end, we must consider how to support the Afghan government in the years ahead, ensuring they maintain the progress we have made together and stop the country from once again becoming a safe haven for terrorists. We should review plans for NATO’s new mission to train, advise and assist the Afghan security forces from the start of next year. And we should discuss the future financial sustainment of the Afghan troops as we work towards the long-term goal of Afghanistan being able to sustain its own forces.

Third, we must agree how NATO will address the risks and challenges from an unstable world of failed states, regional conflicts, terrorism and cyber-attacks. We must ensure that NATO has the capabilities it needs to respond to changing threats. That requires investment. The UK is already one of 4 members of the alliance to meet the target of spending 2% of our GDP on defence and I would urge other allies to make the strongest possible commitment to increase their defence spending, and to devote at least one fifth of it to equipment and research. As our economies start to recover, reversing the decline in defence spending and investing in our defence capabilities would strengthen alliance cohesion and signal that NATO means business.

While we invest in our forces at home, we should also do more to provide practical support to other countries that need to strengthen their own security. We have learnt in Afghanistan the benefit of supporting a country to build up its forces so that they are better able to protect their own region. In Wales, I would like us to agree on new defence capacity building missions to other parts of the world, for example Georgia or the Middle East.

Fourth, as the world’s broadest security network with partnerships with over 40 countries and organisations on 5 continents, we should demonstrate a clear commitment to working with others who share our values and to maintaining an international rules-based order that promotes freedom, democracy and the rule of law. I support the proposed interoperability initiative with 24 of our partners to sustain these skills and relationships and I would like our defence ministers to meet with a smaller group to discuss enhanced opportunities for working together.

Fifth, and finally, we should recognise the sacrifices made by our armed forces. In the UK, we have enshrined an Armed Forces Covenant in law to ensure that our armed forces get the respect and support they deserve. Building on this, I would like the alliance to establish a new charter that makes clear our shared commitment to our armed forces. This is a personal priority for me - a “North Atlantic Armed Forces Charter”, signed by us all, would underline our commitment to treating our armed forces and their families fairly and providing them with the necessary support and care when they retire or are wounded or killed. We should also agree to share more systematically our best practice in this area, starting with the provision of medical care and support for injured service personnel and bereaved families.

These are ambitious priorities. Our foreign and defence ministers made good progress at their meetings in June. Our technical experts will continue this work in the coming weeks. But in Wales in September we must find the political will and decisive leadership required to overcome the remaining stumbling blocks.

At the London Summit in 1990, leaders agreed that “we need to keep standing together, to extend the long peace we have enjoyed these past 4 decades”. That remains just as true today. By working together we will be stronger together. The Wales Summit should prove that NATO is a rock solid alliance with strong partnerships around the world that fosters global peace and stability, creating a secure environment for economies to grow. It is an alliance that reassures our 900 million citizens that together we can protect them from the changing and multiplying threats of an unpredictable world. 

Russia is once again isolating itself from the international community, setting back decades of genuine progress.

Said : President Obama in a statement on Ukraine, released by the White House Press Secretary yesterday.

The President Speaks on the Situation in Ukraine

Mr. Obama said since the shoot-down of the Malaysian Airlines flight over territory controlled by Russian-backed separatists in Ukraine, Russia and its proxies in Ukraine have failed to cooperate with the investigation and have continued to interfere in the crash investigation and to tamper with the evidence. "They have continued to shoot down Ukrainian aircraft in the region resulting in the death of scores of Ukrainian civilians."

"Meanwhile, Russia continues to support the separatists and encourage them, and train them, and arm them.  Satellite images, along with information we've declassified in recent days, show that forces inside Russia have launched artillery strikes into Ukraine - another major violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty. And we have information that Russia continues to build up its own forces near the Ukrainian border and that more Russian military equipment, including artillery, armored vehicles, and air defense equipment, has been transferred across the border to these separatists," he said.

Mr. Obama said : "Yesterday, I had a chance to speak with Prime Minister Cameron of the United Kingdom, President Hollande of France, Chancellor Merkel of Germany, and Prime Minister Renzi of Italy. We are united in our view that the situation in Ukraine ought to be resolved diplomatically and that a sovereign, independent Ukraine is no threat to Russian interests. But we've also made it clear, as I have many times, that if Russia continues on its current path, the cost on Russia will continue to grow. And today is a reminder that the United States means what it says. And we will rally the international community in standing up for the rights and freedom of people around the world."

Mr. Obama announced imposing of new sanctions in key sectors of the Russian economy:  energy, arms, and finance blocking the exports of specific goods and technologies to the Russian energy sector. These sanctions involve more Russian banks and defense companies.  Mr. Obama also announced formal suspension of credit that encourages exports to Russia and financing for economic development projects in Russia.

Mr. Obama informed about the European Union's decision of imposing its most significant and wide-ranging sanctions on Russia to date. "In the financial sector, the EU is cutting off certain financing to state-owned banks in Russia. In the energy sector, the EU will stop exporting specific goods and technologies to Russia, which will make it more difficult for Russia to develop its oil resources over the long term.  In the defense sector, the EU is prohibiting new arms imports and exports and is halting the export of sensitive technology to Russia’s military users," he said. 

Mr. Obama claimed that Russia’s actions in Ukraine and the already imposed US sanctions  have made a weak Russian economy even weaker. "The major sanctions we’re announcing today will continue to ratchet up the pressure on Russia, including the cronies and companies that are supporting Russia’s illegal actions in Ukraine," he said.

"In other words, today, Russia is once again isolating itself from the international community, setting back decades of genuine progress. And it doesn’t have to come to this - it didn’t have to come to this. It does not have to be this way. This is a choice that Russia, and President Putin in particular, has made. There continues to be a better choice - the choice of de-escalation, the choice of joining the world in a diplomatic solution to this situation, a choice in which Russia recognizes that it can be a good neighbor and trading partner with Ukraine even as Ukraine is also developing ties with Europe and other parts of the world," he continued.

In reply to a question whether what was happening in Ukraine could be a new Cold War, Mr. Obama said : "No, it’s not a new Cold War. What it is, is a very specific issue related to Russia’s unwillingness to recognize that Ukraine can chart its own path." 

In reply to another question about the effect of sanctions on Putin and the supply of US weapons to Ukraine, Mr. Obama said : "Well, keep in mind, the issue at this point is not the Ukrainian capacity to outfight separatists. They are better armed than the separatists.  The issue is how do we prevent bloodshed in eastern Ukraine.  We’re trying to avoid that.  And the main tool that we have to influence Russian behavior at this point is the impact that it’s having on its economy."

"The combination of stronger U.S. and European sanctions is going to have a greater impact on the Russian economy than we’ve seen so far.  Obviously, we can't in the end make President Putin see more clearly. Ultimately that's something that President Putin has to do by - on his own. But what we can do is make sure that we’ve increased the costs for actions that I think are not only destructive to Ukraine but ultimately are going to be destructive to Russia, as well," he said.

Mr. Obama assured that he would continue to engage President Putin as well as President Poroshenko and his European partners in pursuit of a diplomatic solution. At the same time, he made it clear that Russia must understand that "the path for a peaceful resolution to this crisis involves recognizing the sovereignty, the territorial integrity, and the independence of the Ukrainian people."