With no immediate problems. Of course being an alternate Tuesday night I didn't go to the Supermarket. I did though go to the Off-License. As a result I am currently sitting here trying to decide whether to get really drunk and wake up at lunchtime tomorrow or perhaps only get mildly drunk and then do some work. I suppose the real decider will be the Paris fashion week schedule.
Who do I need to speak to about that?
20:15 on 4/3/13 (Uk date).
Tuesday, 4 March 2014
Obamacare and Dependency.
I suppose this has a slight para-Olympic theme.
Although I don't really like doing this you may remember that I have a friend who suffers from Attention Deficit Hyper-Activity Disorder (ADHD). He used to work as a delivery driver for a food wholesaler before setting up business as courier which essentially means he's a self-employed delivery driver. Anyway I've been trying to get hold of him recently. In part this is because I haven't spoken to him in the best part of three months. A much larger part though is the fact I'm pretty sure that I could have made the event of his step-daughter dragging him to Beyonce's concert in London on Sunday (2/3/14) a lot more interesting.
The problem is that someone keeps interfering with his phone with calls don't get connected etc. This obviously makes it very difficult for his girlfriend to get hold of him creating pressures within his home life. It also makes it difficult for me to get hold of him and most importantly of all it means that potential customers cannot get hold of him. As a result his business is becoming dangerously dependent on a heavily government subsided food retailer that specialised in supplying Obamacare-style free school meals to deprived inner city children. In effect he has become a delivery driver for this company only they don't have to worry about things like paying him the minimum wage.
This is obviously being done to provide the UK with a grand case study demonstrating how they can they can transform the disabled into a cheap labour force. Perhaps mis-reading their audience this is obviously something the UK wants to showcase at the para-Olympics because the independent living approach to disability is clearly something that is highly valued by para-Olympians.
What is quite amusing is that the US - primarily through Barack Obama's Twitter account - are trying to claim they are responsible for these communication problem's as punishment for my refusal to get on board with their operation to destroy Rihanna. I say it's amusing because it's quite clear that the US and Obama in particular have absolutely no influence whatsoever over this situation.
17:20 on 4/3/14 (UK date).
Although I don't really like doing this you may remember that I have a friend who suffers from Attention Deficit Hyper-Activity Disorder (ADHD). He used to work as a delivery driver for a food wholesaler before setting up business as courier which essentially means he's a self-employed delivery driver. Anyway I've been trying to get hold of him recently. In part this is because I haven't spoken to him in the best part of three months. A much larger part though is the fact I'm pretty sure that I could have made the event of his step-daughter dragging him to Beyonce's concert in London on Sunday (2/3/14) a lot more interesting.
The problem is that someone keeps interfering with his phone with calls don't get connected etc. This obviously makes it very difficult for his girlfriend to get hold of him creating pressures within his home life. It also makes it difficult for me to get hold of him and most importantly of all it means that potential customers cannot get hold of him. As a result his business is becoming dangerously dependent on a heavily government subsided food retailer that specialised in supplying Obamacare-style free school meals to deprived inner city children. In effect he has become a delivery driver for this company only they don't have to worry about things like paying him the minimum wage.
This is obviously being done to provide the UK with a grand case study demonstrating how they can they can transform the disabled into a cheap labour force. Perhaps mis-reading their audience this is obviously something the UK wants to showcase at the para-Olympics because the independent living approach to disability is clearly something that is highly valued by para-Olympians.
What is quite amusing is that the US - primarily through Barack Obama's Twitter account - are trying to claim they are responsible for these communication problem's as punishment for my refusal to get on board with their operation to destroy Rihanna. I say it's amusing because it's quite clear that the US and Obama in particular have absolutely no influence whatsoever over this situation.
17:20 on 4/3/14 (UK date).
Monday, 3 March 2014
The Para-Olympic Heritage Flame Lighting Ceremony.
On Saturday (1/3/14) we witnessed a bit of Olympic history with the inaugural lighting of the para-Olympic heritage flame at the Stoke Manderville hospital in the UK where the para-Olympic games were born. Obviously this new idea is intended to both boost the profile of the para-Olympics games and strengthen the links between the UK and future para-Olympic hosts in the same way that Greece is synonymous with the Olympics.
The short eight minute ceremony included lots of references to the 2012 para-Olympic ceremonies in a clear effort to drag out the memory of the 2012 Summer games for as long as possible. It began with British wheelchair racer Hannah Cockcroft holding the flame inside a giant, golden Hephaestic sphere. Officially this was a reference to Hephaestus the Greek god of blacksmiths and craftsmen who according to certain versions of the legend was thrown out of Olympus for having a crippled foot before being the only god to return to Olympus. That obviously makes Hephaestus the original para-Olympic champion and it's claimed that the para-Olympics "Agitos" logo is based on a Hephaestic sphere.
In reality though the spectacle of someone at the centre of a Hephaestic sphere looks like the nucleus at the centre of an atom. This is pretty much universally accepted as a symbol of the concept science so was intended as a reference to the science heavy 2012 para-Olympic opening ceremony that featured Professor Hawking as narrator. Hannah Cockcroft is quite a pretty young woman with big breasts that jiggle about as she races in her wheelchair. In fact I think that following the 2012 games Cockcroft became one of the first disabled people to feature in one of those men's magazines countdown of the 100 sexiest women of the year. As such her inclusion was a reference to disabled people and sexuality that was such a theme of the 2012 opening ceremony. With gay-rights obviously being such a big theme at the 2014 Winter Games in Russia the combination of science and sexuality was a sign that the scientific basis for homosexuality is one of the big issues that is really going to get hammered out during the para-Olympics.
Also the place most people will recognise a Hephaestic sphere from is the fair ground where they are used to spin people around really fast in order for them to experience high g-forces. The "G" in g-force of course stands for Gravity. As such the UK was trying to tease the Russians by reminding them how many Oscar nominations for British made special/visual effects the film "Gravity" had received and later went on to win.
Cockcroft passed the flame onto Caz Walton who is a member of the para-Olympic association and a former para-Olympian herself. In turn Walton handed the flame to Andy Barlow who is a young British prospect for the 2018 games. With this symbolising of old and new over the ceremony moved on to a virtual handing over of the flame to - I think - 8 torch bearers in Russia who will tour the country before converging on Sochi for the lighting of the flame during Friday's (7/3/14) opening ceremony.
This virtual handover involved a live satellite link up with Russia. This provided an opportunity for discussion about the type of coverage the often forgotten about para-Olympics will receive across the world. The hand over began with a Russian made computer animation which seemed to resemble a computer screen-saver. This served to highlight that people who want to watch the para-Olympics in nations where it's not really covered on TV can livestream it on their computers. That of course leads into a wider discussion about computer hacking and Internet security. It also gave the Russians the opportunity to point out that they're hardly far behind the UK in special/visual effects and raise the question of why the visual effects heavy 2013 film "Stalingrad" was not nominated for an Oscar.
Contributing their part to the coverage/access debate the UK's Channel 4 who were broadcasting the ceremony live and will be broadcasting parts of the para-Olympics in the UK opted not to show the Russian video. Instead they cut away first to their presenters and then to a British made video about British para-Olympians. This could have been taken straight from the BBC's coverage of the Winter Olympics that seemed to focus heavily on events featuring British competitors regardless of how little chance those competitors stood or the fact that there were often more important things going on. The women's Ice Hockey final being a case in point.
With that the ceremony ended amid lots of smoky fireworks. Along with the golden colour scheme this was a direct reference to the 2012 para-Olympic closing ceremony which featured lots of fire and lots of smoke. As such it seems the UK is keen for Rihanna or specifically my relationship with Rihanna to join the scientific basis for homosexuality as one of the small number of issues that really get hammered out during the para-Olympics. Rihanna's preparation work for this has not been good with today's Stella McCartney's show at Paris Fashion Week definitely being a mistake.
21:20 on 3/3/14 (UK date).
The short eight minute ceremony included lots of references to the 2012 para-Olympic ceremonies in a clear effort to drag out the memory of the 2012 Summer games for as long as possible. It began with British wheelchair racer Hannah Cockcroft holding the flame inside a giant, golden Hephaestic sphere. Officially this was a reference to Hephaestus the Greek god of blacksmiths and craftsmen who according to certain versions of the legend was thrown out of Olympus for having a crippled foot before being the only god to return to Olympus. That obviously makes Hephaestus the original para-Olympic champion and it's claimed that the para-Olympics "Agitos" logo is based on a Hephaestic sphere.
In reality though the spectacle of someone at the centre of a Hephaestic sphere looks like the nucleus at the centre of an atom. This is pretty much universally accepted as a symbol of the concept science so was intended as a reference to the science heavy 2012 para-Olympic opening ceremony that featured Professor Hawking as narrator. Hannah Cockcroft is quite a pretty young woman with big breasts that jiggle about as she races in her wheelchair. In fact I think that following the 2012 games Cockcroft became one of the first disabled people to feature in one of those men's magazines countdown of the 100 sexiest women of the year. As such her inclusion was a reference to disabled people and sexuality that was such a theme of the 2012 opening ceremony. With gay-rights obviously being such a big theme at the 2014 Winter Games in Russia the combination of science and sexuality was a sign that the scientific basis for homosexuality is one of the big issues that is really going to get hammered out during the para-Olympics.
Also the place most people will recognise a Hephaestic sphere from is the fair ground where they are used to spin people around really fast in order for them to experience high g-forces. The "G" in g-force of course stands for Gravity. As such the UK was trying to tease the Russians by reminding them how many Oscar nominations for British made special/visual effects the film "Gravity" had received and later went on to win.
Cockcroft passed the flame onto Caz Walton who is a member of the para-Olympic association and a former para-Olympian herself. In turn Walton handed the flame to Andy Barlow who is a young British prospect for the 2018 games. With this symbolising of old and new over the ceremony moved on to a virtual handing over of the flame to - I think - 8 torch bearers in Russia who will tour the country before converging on Sochi for the lighting of the flame during Friday's (7/3/14) opening ceremony.
This virtual handover involved a live satellite link up with Russia. This provided an opportunity for discussion about the type of coverage the often forgotten about para-Olympics will receive across the world. The hand over began with a Russian made computer animation which seemed to resemble a computer screen-saver. This served to highlight that people who want to watch the para-Olympics in nations where it's not really covered on TV can livestream it on their computers. That of course leads into a wider discussion about computer hacking and Internet security. It also gave the Russians the opportunity to point out that they're hardly far behind the UK in special/visual effects and raise the question of why the visual effects heavy 2013 film "Stalingrad" was not nominated for an Oscar.
Contributing their part to the coverage/access debate the UK's Channel 4 who were broadcasting the ceremony live and will be broadcasting parts of the para-Olympics in the UK opted not to show the Russian video. Instead they cut away first to their presenters and then to a British made video about British para-Olympians. This could have been taken straight from the BBC's coverage of the Winter Olympics that seemed to focus heavily on events featuring British competitors regardless of how little chance those competitors stood or the fact that there were often more important things going on. The women's Ice Hockey final being a case in point.
With that the ceremony ended amid lots of smoky fireworks. Along with the golden colour scheme this was a direct reference to the 2012 para-Olympic closing ceremony which featured lots of fire and lots of smoke. As such it seems the UK is keen for Rihanna or specifically my relationship with Rihanna to join the scientific basis for homosexuality as one of the small number of issues that really get hammered out during the para-Olympics. Rihanna's preparation work for this has not been good with today's Stella McCartney's show at Paris Fashion Week definitely being a mistake.
21:20 on 3/3/14 (UK date).
Let's Hear it For the Oscars!
On Sunday (2/3/14) the 86th Academy Awards or "Oscars" were held in Los Angeles, California, US. This years ceremony honouring achievements in film was moved specifically to avoid clashing with the 2014 Winter Olympics that were held in Sochi, Russia. Mindful of the fact that with para-Olympics starting on Friday (7/3/14) we are only really in the half-time intermission of the Sochi games this years Oscars were a deliberately low key affair with political statements very much kept in the background.
As a result two of the big, widely tipped films "American Hustle" and "The Wolf of Wall Street" were completely snubbed failing to win any awards. At their hearts both American Hustle and The Wolf of Wall Street are stories about confidence or con-tricks and corruption. American Hustle is set amongst the world of American politics while The Wolf of Wall Street is set in the world of global capitalism. So by not giving either film any awards the Oscar judges were very clearly refusing to endorse corruption in either politics or banking.
The big winner of the night was "Gravity" which won 7 awards. Set in outer space Gravity doesn't really have any overt political message making it a very safe choice. However setting a film in space where there is no gravity presents a huge range of challenges for filmmakers working here on earth. As a result 6 of Gravity's awards came in the technical categories such as visual effects, sound mixing and sound editing. These reflected the technological advances that had to be invented in order to make the film and will no doubt now go on and be used in many more films. The Best Director award was handed Alfonso Cuaron for his efforts bringing all these complex elements together in the making of Gravity.
Another film that did well was "12 Years a Slave" which was awarded the prestigious Best Picture award. Although 12 Years a Slave is a strong film a large part of its success seems to come from the fact that it wasn't American Hustle, The Wolf of Wall Street which were being deliberately snubbed nor Gravity or "Dallas Buyers Club" which were both heavily awarded in other areas. That said 12 Years a Slave has actually been on a bit of a journey as its made its way through the international film awards season.
Obviously 12 Years a Slave should be commended for reminding everyone of the horrors of US/African slavery and its central story of a freed black man being kidnapped in the US' northern states in order to be sold into slavery in the southern states briefly touches on the rarely told story of the way legal slavery ended in the US and its effects on South America. However I don't think it really counts a news that legal slavery in the US was a bad thing and the way that 12 Years a Slave focuses very narrowly on the plight of black slaves in the US kind of gives the impression that Africans being shipped off to the US was the beginning, middle and end of the story of slavery. That of course completely ignores the several thousands of years of slavery that proceeded the discovery of the US and the plight of people who are still held in slavery as I write.
In fact the way that the British director Steve McQueen has been talking about slavery suggests to me that he is confused between the issues of slavery and racism. That confusion is quite common in the US and certainly complicates race relations in the country leading to quite an interesting talking point. Unfortunately this seems to have gone right over McQueen's head with him acknowledging modern day slavery in his acceptance speech which indicates that he'd finally started picking up on the heavy hints that have been dropped in his direction recently.
12 Years a Slave also brought Oscar success for Lupita Nyong'o who won Best Supporting Actress. Despite clearly benefiting from not being in American Hustle Nyong'o's debut performance is said to be very strong. Nyong'o also provides an interesting talking point because as always happens when a new success story emerges everyone fights to claim ownership of it with both the US and the UK staking large claims to Nyong'o's success. The fact that the Kenyan actress's success has come in a film about British people stealing African people in order to sell them to American people means that there has been a certain irony to all this.
In contrast to its rejection of the corruption and con-tricks of American Hustle and The Wolf of Wall Street the Oscars were keen to show their support for practical philanthropic work. This included a special award for Angelina Jolie who has spent the last year and more doing the tough job of actually arguing with senior members of the governments of many nations over the practical and technical aspects of complex issues such as refugees from the conflict in Syria to name just one. The Academy also heaped praise on Dallas Buyers Club which won three awards including Best Make-up and Hairstyling which was a direct snub to American Hustle.
Dallas Buyers Club tells the true story of Ron Woodruff who was diagnosed as HIV+ in 1985 at the height of the great panic about HIV/AIDS. Simply refusing to die Woodruff went on to set a buyer's club which allowed people with HIV access to the latest treatments. The fact that Woodruff had to smuggle these untested treatments into the US obviously put him on a collision course with the US' federal government. Although a few films have been made about the initial outbreak of HIV/AIDS in the early 1980's - which is undoubtedly an important period in global history - they tend to be quite miserable affairs that reflect the fear and the sense of helplessness of the time. Dallas Buyers Club instead focuses on people fighting back and taking practical steps to overcome adversity. Also through the course of the film Matthew McConaughey's Woodruff starts out being very homophobic but by being forced to spend time with Jared Leto's gay, transsexual Rayon overcomes that homophobia. With the current debate about gay-rights currently raging across the world and especially in the US this is exactly the sort of example the Oscars want to set. Finally McConaughey lost a lot of weight for the role which is the sort of dedication to the craft that the Oscars likes to reward.
Jared Leto also won Best Supporting Actor for his Reyon role. Obviously that reflects what - by all accounts - was a very strong performance and heaps further praise on the film. However the fact that Reyon is not only a homosexual but also a transsexual brings up the issue of transgenderism which is a scientifically complex and often overlooked niche of the debate about the rights of Lesbians, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered (LGBT) people. Finally the fact that Leto is a beautiful, beautiful man who makes for a very convincing woman seems to highlight the way in which the lines of human sexuality can become a bit blurred. Personally I don't think that was a particularly useful contribution because if a straight man is attracted to someone who has made a great effort to make themselves look like a woman it just means that they are attracted to women.
The way in which the US gay community has attempted to address gay-rights - particularly in the run-up to the Sochi Olympics - was further put up for discussion by P!nk's musical tribute to the classic film "The Wizard of Oz." That film and it's star Judy Garland are of course massive gay icons but it is also very much a work of fantasy which is highlighted by the song "Over the Rainbow" which P!nk performed. As such the Academy seemed to be asking if US gay-rights activists got caught up in a sort of whirlwind of hysteria ahead of the Sochi games and in fact ended up doing more damage to gay rights in Russia?
In the always political documentary categories the rather safe "20 Feet From Stardom" won best feature as a little reference to all the people in the entertainment industry who work behind the scenes, just out of the spotlight. This of course meant that "The Square" the widely tipped Egyptian film about the Egyptian revolution lost. I think that reflects a feeling that with the passing of Egypt's deeply flawed constitution Egypt's revolution has now stalled and the nation is heading back to the dark days of Mubarak. However that is a complex issue that I will have deal with on its own. Best documentary short went to "Lady in No 6: Music Saved My Life" reflecting the fact that the Oscars still love films about the Nazi holocaust and the subject of the documentary Alice Herz Sommer actually died last Friday (23/2/14) rather highlighting the fact that the Nazi-holocaust is slipping away from being a part of living history.
Emphasising that while the Oscars were going for a low-key, non-political ceremony they still need to put on a show for the millions of people sitting at home, probably eating pizza, the host Ellen Degeneres made a spectacle of handing out take away pizza to the assembled guests. Degeneres also got a few of the assembled celebrities to pose of a "Selfie" which then went on to become the most re-Tweeted Tweet in the history of Twitter. This of course highlighted the way that famous people can be annoyed by fans trying to have their picture taken at the most inappropriate times. However it also highlighted the power of the Oscars and the way that people try and muscle in on that power.
There was plenty of evidence of that with Twitter being awash with people trying to push political campaigns on the Oscars audience. One of the main ones of these was a campaign highlighting the plight of Rohingya Muslims who are being terribly oppressed by the Buddhist majority Myanmar/Burma. Many people think that the international community should be refusing to do business with Myanmar out of protest at this but the US is particular is leading a charge to normalise relations with Myanmar in an effort to take manufacturing jobs away from China by offering lower wages. This is of course an important issue but it is one that everyone in government/business is already well aware of so I'm not sure what role celebrities have to play. It would have probably been a better idea to target a music award ceremony like The Grammys because pop-stars have lines of cheaply manufactured merchandise in a way that film people just don't.
The was also a campaign to get Venezuela and Ukraine mentioned by those attending the Oscars. I think I've covered and will continue to cover Ukraine in a lot of detail but the campaign to get Venezuela mentioned was particularly ironic. Due to chronic mis-management by Chavez Venezuela has a lot of trouble getting hold of US dollars which are needed for international trade. As a result a lot of imported goods, especially from the US are difficult to get hold off. The business owners who want Chavez's replacement Maduro out are exploiting this by further strangling the supply of dollars and hiking prices in an effort to provoke Venezuela's consumers to try and bring down the government. So the Venezuelans who were calling for protests while consuming the Oscars are in fact protesting against themselves. No wonder Jared Leto paid them a little slight in his acceptance speech by referencing the 2003 Bernardo Bertolucci film "The Dreamers."
17:30 on 3/3/14 (UK date).
As a result two of the big, widely tipped films "American Hustle" and "The Wolf of Wall Street" were completely snubbed failing to win any awards. At their hearts both American Hustle and The Wolf of Wall Street are stories about confidence or con-tricks and corruption. American Hustle is set amongst the world of American politics while The Wolf of Wall Street is set in the world of global capitalism. So by not giving either film any awards the Oscar judges were very clearly refusing to endorse corruption in either politics or banking.
The big winner of the night was "Gravity" which won 7 awards. Set in outer space Gravity doesn't really have any overt political message making it a very safe choice. However setting a film in space where there is no gravity presents a huge range of challenges for filmmakers working here on earth. As a result 6 of Gravity's awards came in the technical categories such as visual effects, sound mixing and sound editing. These reflected the technological advances that had to be invented in order to make the film and will no doubt now go on and be used in many more films. The Best Director award was handed Alfonso Cuaron for his efforts bringing all these complex elements together in the making of Gravity.
Another film that did well was "12 Years a Slave" which was awarded the prestigious Best Picture award. Although 12 Years a Slave is a strong film a large part of its success seems to come from the fact that it wasn't American Hustle, The Wolf of Wall Street which were being deliberately snubbed nor Gravity or "Dallas Buyers Club" which were both heavily awarded in other areas. That said 12 Years a Slave has actually been on a bit of a journey as its made its way through the international film awards season.
Obviously 12 Years a Slave should be commended for reminding everyone of the horrors of US/African slavery and its central story of a freed black man being kidnapped in the US' northern states in order to be sold into slavery in the southern states briefly touches on the rarely told story of the way legal slavery ended in the US and its effects on South America. However I don't think it really counts a news that legal slavery in the US was a bad thing and the way that 12 Years a Slave focuses very narrowly on the plight of black slaves in the US kind of gives the impression that Africans being shipped off to the US was the beginning, middle and end of the story of slavery. That of course completely ignores the several thousands of years of slavery that proceeded the discovery of the US and the plight of people who are still held in slavery as I write.
In fact the way that the British director Steve McQueen has been talking about slavery suggests to me that he is confused between the issues of slavery and racism. That confusion is quite common in the US and certainly complicates race relations in the country leading to quite an interesting talking point. Unfortunately this seems to have gone right over McQueen's head with him acknowledging modern day slavery in his acceptance speech which indicates that he'd finally started picking up on the heavy hints that have been dropped in his direction recently.
12 Years a Slave also brought Oscar success for Lupita Nyong'o who won Best Supporting Actress. Despite clearly benefiting from not being in American Hustle Nyong'o's debut performance is said to be very strong. Nyong'o also provides an interesting talking point because as always happens when a new success story emerges everyone fights to claim ownership of it with both the US and the UK staking large claims to Nyong'o's success. The fact that the Kenyan actress's success has come in a film about British people stealing African people in order to sell them to American people means that there has been a certain irony to all this.
In contrast to its rejection of the corruption and con-tricks of American Hustle and The Wolf of Wall Street the Oscars were keen to show their support for practical philanthropic work. This included a special award for Angelina Jolie who has spent the last year and more doing the tough job of actually arguing with senior members of the governments of many nations over the practical and technical aspects of complex issues such as refugees from the conflict in Syria to name just one. The Academy also heaped praise on Dallas Buyers Club which won three awards including Best Make-up and Hairstyling which was a direct snub to American Hustle.
Dallas Buyers Club tells the true story of Ron Woodruff who was diagnosed as HIV+ in 1985 at the height of the great panic about HIV/AIDS. Simply refusing to die Woodruff went on to set a buyer's club which allowed people with HIV access to the latest treatments. The fact that Woodruff had to smuggle these untested treatments into the US obviously put him on a collision course with the US' federal government. Although a few films have been made about the initial outbreak of HIV/AIDS in the early 1980's - which is undoubtedly an important period in global history - they tend to be quite miserable affairs that reflect the fear and the sense of helplessness of the time. Dallas Buyers Club instead focuses on people fighting back and taking practical steps to overcome adversity. Also through the course of the film Matthew McConaughey's Woodruff starts out being very homophobic but by being forced to spend time with Jared Leto's gay, transsexual Rayon overcomes that homophobia. With the current debate about gay-rights currently raging across the world and especially in the US this is exactly the sort of example the Oscars want to set. Finally McConaughey lost a lot of weight for the role which is the sort of dedication to the craft that the Oscars likes to reward.
Jared Leto also won Best Supporting Actor for his Reyon role. Obviously that reflects what - by all accounts - was a very strong performance and heaps further praise on the film. However the fact that Reyon is not only a homosexual but also a transsexual brings up the issue of transgenderism which is a scientifically complex and often overlooked niche of the debate about the rights of Lesbians, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered (LGBT) people. Finally the fact that Leto is a beautiful, beautiful man who makes for a very convincing woman seems to highlight the way in which the lines of human sexuality can become a bit blurred. Personally I don't think that was a particularly useful contribution because if a straight man is attracted to someone who has made a great effort to make themselves look like a woman it just means that they are attracted to women.
The way in which the US gay community has attempted to address gay-rights - particularly in the run-up to the Sochi Olympics - was further put up for discussion by P!nk's musical tribute to the classic film "The Wizard of Oz." That film and it's star Judy Garland are of course massive gay icons but it is also very much a work of fantasy which is highlighted by the song "Over the Rainbow" which P!nk performed. As such the Academy seemed to be asking if US gay-rights activists got caught up in a sort of whirlwind of hysteria ahead of the Sochi games and in fact ended up doing more damage to gay rights in Russia?
In the always political documentary categories the rather safe "20 Feet From Stardom" won best feature as a little reference to all the people in the entertainment industry who work behind the scenes, just out of the spotlight. This of course meant that "The Square" the widely tipped Egyptian film about the Egyptian revolution lost. I think that reflects a feeling that with the passing of Egypt's deeply flawed constitution Egypt's revolution has now stalled and the nation is heading back to the dark days of Mubarak. However that is a complex issue that I will have deal with on its own. Best documentary short went to "Lady in No 6: Music Saved My Life" reflecting the fact that the Oscars still love films about the Nazi holocaust and the subject of the documentary Alice Herz Sommer actually died last Friday (23/2/14) rather highlighting the fact that the Nazi-holocaust is slipping away from being a part of living history.
Emphasising that while the Oscars were going for a low-key, non-political ceremony they still need to put on a show for the millions of people sitting at home, probably eating pizza, the host Ellen Degeneres made a spectacle of handing out take away pizza to the assembled guests. Degeneres also got a few of the assembled celebrities to pose of a "Selfie" which then went on to become the most re-Tweeted Tweet in the history of Twitter. This of course highlighted the way that famous people can be annoyed by fans trying to have their picture taken at the most inappropriate times. However it also highlighted the power of the Oscars and the way that people try and muscle in on that power.
There was plenty of evidence of that with Twitter being awash with people trying to push political campaigns on the Oscars audience. One of the main ones of these was a campaign highlighting the plight of Rohingya Muslims who are being terribly oppressed by the Buddhist majority Myanmar/Burma. Many people think that the international community should be refusing to do business with Myanmar out of protest at this but the US is particular is leading a charge to normalise relations with Myanmar in an effort to take manufacturing jobs away from China by offering lower wages. This is of course an important issue but it is one that everyone in government/business is already well aware of so I'm not sure what role celebrities have to play. It would have probably been a better idea to target a music award ceremony like The Grammys because pop-stars have lines of cheaply manufactured merchandise in a way that film people just don't.
The was also a campaign to get Venezuela and Ukraine mentioned by those attending the Oscars. I think I've covered and will continue to cover Ukraine in a lot of detail but the campaign to get Venezuela mentioned was particularly ironic. Due to chronic mis-management by Chavez Venezuela has a lot of trouble getting hold of US dollars which are needed for international trade. As a result a lot of imported goods, especially from the US are difficult to get hold off. The business owners who want Chavez's replacement Maduro out are exploiting this by further strangling the supply of dollars and hiking prices in an effort to provoke Venezuela's consumers to try and bring down the government. So the Venezuelans who were calling for protests while consuming the Oscars are in fact protesting against themselves. No wonder Jared Leto paid them a little slight in his acceptance speech by referencing the 2003 Bernardo Bertolucci film "The Dreamers."
17:30 on 3/3/14 (UK date).
Sunday, 2 March 2014
I Had a Day Off Thursday.
I had planned to spend it at the gym. Unfortunately the previous (26/2/14) day's walk to and from the barbers only served to remind me how much strength and mobility I've lost in my right ankle recently. As a result I decided to upgrade my exercise regime to "Strolling."
The first part of that strolling brought me into the kitchen where I decided to make a stew. At that point my neighbour "Ratko Mladic" decide to arrive to 'improve' the lock on my kitchen door. I, of course, decided to leave him and my father to it. In fact I settled down to watch an episode of "Castle" in the front room. I think it may have been the "Steampunk" episode but around 25 minutes in I thought - looking across one of those crime scenes - "Crikey! Those sirens sound real."
Anyway as I looked up and left through the window I saw a London Metropolitan Police Support Unit (MET PSU) arriving at speed. I also saw two young black gentleman 'bailing it' over the bonnet of a silver hatchback. One exited stage-right pursued by presumably two members of the Met's Tactical Support Group (TSG). The other exited stage-left up my driveway pursued by two police officers. My first thought was; "He's going to get a surprise."
22:05 on 2/3/14 (UK date).
Unfortunately by the time I'd extricated myself and my surprising thought from the sofa it had all blown past. I gather what is now known as "The Suspect" leapt the rear wall pursued by one of the police officers. The other, more black looking, police officer remained - under supervision - in my garden. It was it at this point I went back to TV. However I gather that in the full "Hot Fuzz" style the "Police Officer" and "The Suspect" enjoyed a few fences of chase before the Suspect was apprehended. Apparently the other Suspect was also apprehended close to what are known locally as "The Steps."
It turns out that this was all caused by a car that failed to stop. I'm assuming that the TSG chased it into our 'cul-de-sac' at which point the vehicle was abandoned. As a result of this and their worried demands for a helicopter at said address the TSG were punished by being forced to stand guard over 'said address' until the forensic team were available to remove the vehicle. About three hours later I decided that - even during the Olympics - it was a horrific waste of resources for 8 police to stand guard when 1 Police Community Support Officer (PCSO) or even a private "Crime Scene Guard" really could have done the job. After all if I am to receive a diplomatic guard I expect there to be at least two of them and for them both to be excessively armed.
Obviously we have had calls from "the other place" suggesting that I sue the police over that criminal damage escapade. I am clearly interested in moving forward with both that idea and the recovery of my hammer. Apart from the Sochi games this effort has been somewhat hampered by the fact that "Sarastro" - the detective in charge of my case - is now somewhat less then a detective. Apparently only the "Officer In Charge (OIC)" is allowed to 'make decisions' regarding "evidence" though.
22:35 on 2/3/14 (UK date).
The first part of that strolling brought me into the kitchen where I decided to make a stew. At that point my neighbour "Ratko Mladic" decide to arrive to 'improve' the lock on my kitchen door. I, of course, decided to leave him and my father to it. In fact I settled down to watch an episode of "Castle" in the front room. I think it may have been the "Steampunk" episode but around 25 minutes in I thought - looking across one of those crime scenes - "Crikey! Those sirens sound real."
Anyway as I looked up and left through the window I saw a London Metropolitan Police Support Unit (MET PSU) arriving at speed. I also saw two young black gentleman 'bailing it' over the bonnet of a silver hatchback. One exited stage-right pursued by presumably two members of the Met's Tactical Support Group (TSG). The other exited stage-left up my driveway pursued by two police officers. My first thought was; "He's going to get a surprise."
22:05 on 2/3/14 (UK date).
Unfortunately by the time I'd extricated myself and my surprising thought from the sofa it had all blown past. I gather what is now known as "The Suspect" leapt the rear wall pursued by one of the police officers. The other, more black looking, police officer remained - under supervision - in my garden. It was it at this point I went back to TV. However I gather that in the full "Hot Fuzz" style the "Police Officer" and "The Suspect" enjoyed a few fences of chase before the Suspect was apprehended. Apparently the other Suspect was also apprehended close to what are known locally as "The Steps."
It turns out that this was all caused by a car that failed to stop. I'm assuming that the TSG chased it into our 'cul-de-sac' at which point the vehicle was abandoned. As a result of this and their worried demands for a helicopter at said address the TSG were punished by being forced to stand guard over 'said address' until the forensic team were available to remove the vehicle. About three hours later I decided that - even during the Olympics - it was a horrific waste of resources for 8 police to stand guard when 1 Police Community Support Officer (PCSO) or even a private "Crime Scene Guard" really could have done the job. After all if I am to receive a diplomatic guard I expect there to be at least two of them and for them both to be excessively armed.
Obviously we have had calls from "the other place" suggesting that I sue the police over that criminal damage escapade. I am clearly interested in moving forward with both that idea and the recovery of my hammer. Apart from the Sochi games this effort has been somewhat hampered by the fact that "Sarastro" - the detective in charge of my case - is now somewhat less then a detective. Apparently only the "Officer In Charge (OIC)" is allowed to 'make decisions' regarding "evidence" though.
22:35 on 2/3/14 (UK date).
Africa, Ukraine and Syria.
Although it may have got lost in the final days of the 2014 Winter Olympics I think I did point out nations led by the US and the UK used the chaos in Ukraine to force through United Nations Security Resolution (UNSC) 2139/2014 demanding Syria throw open its borders to international aid groups. The reason why the US and the UK needed the drama of the Sochi games and the turmoil in Ukraine to drive through this Australian sponsored resolution is because its passing presents two very serious problems for the UNSC.
Firstly it demands that the Syrian government no longer controls the movements of aid agencies across its internal and international borders. This not only violates Chapter 1, Article 2.1 of the UN's own charter which "[Bases] the organisation on the principle of sovereign equality of all members" but also Chapter 1, Article 2.4 which declares that "[All members] will refrain... from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity...of any state" and Chapter 1 Article 2.7 which prevents "[The UN intervening] in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state."
Secondly the 2012 conviction of Charles Taylor by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes and crimes against humanity made it quite clear that any nation, individual or organisation who provides material support (humanitarian supplies including medical supplies were specifically referenced) to groups who carry out war crimes or crimes against humanity are as liable for those crimes as if they had carried them out themselves. As non-uniformed/unlawful combatants the mere presence of the Syrian insurgents constitutes a war crime and their conduct including genocide/ethnic cleansing, mutilation (and cannibalism) of prisoners and the use of civilians as human shields most certainly constitute crimes against humanity. As such the Syrian government along with its neighbours such as Turkey are under a legal obligation to prevent humanitarian aid from reaching insurgent held areas. It is beyond the authority of the UNSC or any other body to demand that the Syrian government does not uphold this legal obligation and the UNSC may actually be under an obligation to report any agency that is attempting to provide material support to the insurgency to the ICC.
These two problems are significant enough to render resolution 2139/2014 null and void meaning that the UNSC will have great trouble enforcing it. However these violations of both the UN Charter and International law are widely tolerated across the world. This is particularly true in conflicts such as Libya with its knock on effects in Mali and Nigeria, Somalia, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and the Central African Republic (CAR).
Sensing that UNSC 2139/2014's incompatibility within international law is going to cause it some problems the UK has recently been forcing these African conflicts to the fore in the hope daring the UNSC not to raise questions over the conflict in Syria. The first move in this was the announcement late in the week beginning 17/2/14 that a shipment of weapons from the US to the Somali government via Uganda had some how found its way into the hands of the Al-Shabaab Islamists who are currently fighting the Somali government, the Ugandan government and the Kenyan government. The intention here was to dip the US' hands in blood by directly linking them to the illegal supply of weapons to African Islamists. The idea being that having been made a part of what is a criminal conspiracy the US would be less likely to call for those more involved in the same conspiracy to be punished.
Next the UK moved onto Nigeria were it is well established that the UK has been supplying Boko Haram Islamists in an effort to destabilise the oil rich nation. The wave of Boko Haram attacks this past week began last Sunday (23/2/14) with an attack on a school in the town of Bama which left 100 dead - most of them burned alive. On Tuesday (25/2/14) another school in Buni Yadi was attacked killing at least 50. On Thursday (27/2/14) Boko Haram killed 37 with attacks on the town of Michika which was razed to the ground, a Christian college in the town of Shuwa and the town of Kirchinga. On Saturday (1/3/14) 35 were killed in twin bomb blasts in Maiduguri and today (2/3/14) 39 people have been killed in an attack on the nearby village of Mainok.
At all of these attacks witnesses have described the attackers as wearing military-style uniforms but not displaying any military insignia making them unlawful combatants. They have also come in the week in which Nigeria has celebrated its independence and French President has been visiting the nation. The UK's thinking seems to be that if the UNSC can be cowered into not complaining about the UK's support for Boko Haram's killing of 261 people in a week the UNSC will also be cowered into staying silent over events in Syria.
The fact that the deployment of Russian Marines in Ukraine has now got UNSC members such as the UK and the US clambering over each other to condemn the use of non-uniformed troops and the violation of a nation's territorial integrity means that I think Russian President Putin has earned the right to feel a little bit proud of himself.
17:25 on 2/3/14 (UK date).
Firstly it demands that the Syrian government no longer controls the movements of aid agencies across its internal and international borders. This not only violates Chapter 1, Article 2.1 of the UN's own charter which "[Bases] the organisation on the principle of sovereign equality of all members" but also Chapter 1, Article 2.4 which declares that "[All members] will refrain... from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity...of any state" and Chapter 1 Article 2.7 which prevents "[The UN intervening] in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state."
Secondly the 2012 conviction of Charles Taylor by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes and crimes against humanity made it quite clear that any nation, individual or organisation who provides material support (humanitarian supplies including medical supplies were specifically referenced) to groups who carry out war crimes or crimes against humanity are as liable for those crimes as if they had carried them out themselves. As non-uniformed/unlawful combatants the mere presence of the Syrian insurgents constitutes a war crime and their conduct including genocide/ethnic cleansing, mutilation (and cannibalism) of prisoners and the use of civilians as human shields most certainly constitute crimes against humanity. As such the Syrian government along with its neighbours such as Turkey are under a legal obligation to prevent humanitarian aid from reaching insurgent held areas. It is beyond the authority of the UNSC or any other body to demand that the Syrian government does not uphold this legal obligation and the UNSC may actually be under an obligation to report any agency that is attempting to provide material support to the insurgency to the ICC.
These two problems are significant enough to render resolution 2139/2014 null and void meaning that the UNSC will have great trouble enforcing it. However these violations of both the UN Charter and International law are widely tolerated across the world. This is particularly true in conflicts such as Libya with its knock on effects in Mali and Nigeria, Somalia, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and the Central African Republic (CAR).
Sensing that UNSC 2139/2014's incompatibility within international law is going to cause it some problems the UK has recently been forcing these African conflicts to the fore in the hope daring the UNSC not to raise questions over the conflict in Syria. The first move in this was the announcement late in the week beginning 17/2/14 that a shipment of weapons from the US to the Somali government via Uganda had some how found its way into the hands of the Al-Shabaab Islamists who are currently fighting the Somali government, the Ugandan government and the Kenyan government. The intention here was to dip the US' hands in blood by directly linking them to the illegal supply of weapons to African Islamists. The idea being that having been made a part of what is a criminal conspiracy the US would be less likely to call for those more involved in the same conspiracy to be punished.
Next the UK moved onto Nigeria were it is well established that the UK has been supplying Boko Haram Islamists in an effort to destabilise the oil rich nation. The wave of Boko Haram attacks this past week began last Sunday (23/2/14) with an attack on a school in the town of Bama which left 100 dead - most of them burned alive. On Tuesday (25/2/14) another school in Buni Yadi was attacked killing at least 50. On Thursday (27/2/14) Boko Haram killed 37 with attacks on the town of Michika which was razed to the ground, a Christian college in the town of Shuwa and the town of Kirchinga. On Saturday (1/3/14) 35 were killed in twin bomb blasts in Maiduguri and today (2/3/14) 39 people have been killed in an attack on the nearby village of Mainok.
At all of these attacks witnesses have described the attackers as wearing military-style uniforms but not displaying any military insignia making them unlawful combatants. They have also come in the week in which Nigeria has celebrated its independence and French President has been visiting the nation. The UK's thinking seems to be that if the UNSC can be cowered into not complaining about the UK's support for Boko Haram's killing of 261 people in a week the UNSC will also be cowered into staying silent over events in Syria.
The fact that the deployment of Russian Marines in Ukraine has now got UNSC members such as the UK and the US clambering over each other to condemn the use of non-uniformed troops and the violation of a nation's territorial integrity means that I think Russian President Putin has earned the right to feel a little bit proud of himself.
17:25 on 2/3/14 (UK date).
The Latest Insanity in Ukraine.
Since the Cold War the United States has funded and directed extreme nationalist groups such as the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UIA) and the Right Sector. In the past three years this support for and the activities of these groups have become more aggressive as the US tries to exert pressure on Ukraine's neighbour Russia over its support for the Syrian government.
Needless to say matters reached a head during the middle of the 2014 Winter Olympics being held in Sochi, Russia - just across the Black Sea. On Tuesday (18/2/14) members of the UIA and Right Sector attempted to storm the Parliament building in the capital Kiev. This led to a day of violence in which the Ukrainian police were forced to battle them back to their camp in Independence Square. On Wednesday (19/2/14) the Ukrainian government and opposition Parliamentarians agreed a truce that stopped the police clearing the square. Unfortunately the UIA and Right Sector saw this as an opportunity to open fire on and take hostage members of the police. This of course forced the police to return fire under the universal principle of self-defence.
On Friday (20/2/14) The Ukrainian government, opposition Parliamentarians and representatives of the European Union (EU) brokered a transition of power agreement that would have seen Ukraine revert to the 2004 version of its constitution, a government of national unity formed and fresh elections held in December 2014. To further defuse the situation Ukraine's President Vicktor Yanukovych left Kiev for Crimea. The idea being that if the UIA and Right Sector were given the small victory of seizing the Presidential compound they would calm down and not bother advance outside of the capital. Unfortunately Yanukovych then lost his nerve and fled Ukraine entirely.
Without a voice to counter them the UIA and Right Sector aligned with Yulia Tymoshenko's hopelessly corrupt Fatherland party and arbitrarily declared themselves the government of Ukraine. However as the Parliament lacks the legal power to make that decision for the purposes of international law Vicktor Yanukovych remains the President of Ukraine. Almost immediately after seizing the Parliament building the UIA and Right Sector launched into an aggressive series of policies designed to remove all trace of Russian/Slavic culture from Ukraine. For example they banned the speaking of Russian in public life and began tearing down buildings and statues that were put up during the time of the Soviet Union. Most alarmingly yesterday (1/3/14) Dmitry Yarosh the leader of Right Sector and self-proclaimed Deputy Minister for National Security and Defence publicly called on Chechen Islamist leader Doku Umarov to intensify his campaign of terrorist attacks against Russia civilians.
More worrying then their rhetoric the Ukrainian opposition have disbanded the Berkut police division and forced - at gunpoint - its members to kneel in front of a baying mob in Independence Square so the crowd could throw rocks and spit on them. They have also set about gutting the leadership of the Ukrainian military of Russian/Slavic members and replacing them with people sympathetic to the nationalist cause. This creates a very real worry that the UIA and Right Sector are preparing to use military force to impose their extreme neo-Nazi views on the eastern Ukrainians who simply don't want them.
In response people in eastern Ukraine - particularly Crimea - have completely disregarded declarations from Kiev so rather then disbanding the Berkut they've actually been strengthening them. Also they have declared the autonomous Crimean Parliament as the government of Ukraine which legally has about the same level of credibility as the similar declaration from Kiev. Most worryingly they have been holding large protests against Kiev and starting forming militias to protect themselves should Kiev launch an attack. With reports that UIA and Right Sector militias from Kiev are starting to head east this creates a very real possibility of events such as those seen in Xinjiang, China where thugs armed with knives attacked crowds at a railway station killing 30 and wounding over 130 occurring in Ukraine ultimately plunging the nation into civil war.
Fortunately Russia has moved swiftly to calm the situation. On Friday (18/2/14) they deployed Marines on the streets of Crimea will the full permission of the Ukrainian government in Crimea and of Ukrainian President Yanukovych. On Saturday (1/3/14) this deployment was authorised by the Russian Parliament. This force with is said to be as high as 15,000 strong has a very powerful deterrent effect. Firstly it deters the Ukrainian government in Kiev from making any aggressive moves that will inflame the situation. Secondly it allows the people of eastern Ukrainian feel that they are protected from the UIA and Right Sector. This deters them from forming militias of their own which should keep the situation under control because highly trained Russian Marines will behave far more professionally then a rag-tag militia.
The way that the Russians have gone about deploying this peacekeeping force is highly amusing though. Firstly the although uniformed the Marines are not flying any flag nor displaying any insignia. As a result if war were to break out and they became engaged in combat they would be considered unlawful combatants under the Geneva Conventions. Secondly the absence of a Ukrainian government creates all sorts of questions about whether the presence of foreign troops undermines Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial independence. These questions are of massive importance in discussions at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) about the conflicts in Syria and Libya where western nations led by the US seem to have absolutely no problem with unlawful combatants undermining a nation's sovereignty territorial integrity.
It is the posing of these wider questions rather then the presence of Russian troops that has got western members of the UNSC so angry because firstly it highlights their hypocrisy over Syria and Libya and secondly it underlines that what is going on in Ukraine is far from the popular, pro-democracy revolution they like to pretend it is. The only worry is that being a weak man US President Obama will ratchet up the rhetoric in an effort to appear tough and that will inflame the situation to the point where the rather naive Ukrainian government in Kiev do something stupid.
12:45 on 2/3/14 (UK date).
Needless to say matters reached a head during the middle of the 2014 Winter Olympics being held in Sochi, Russia - just across the Black Sea. On Tuesday (18/2/14) members of the UIA and Right Sector attempted to storm the Parliament building in the capital Kiev. This led to a day of violence in which the Ukrainian police were forced to battle them back to their camp in Independence Square. On Wednesday (19/2/14) the Ukrainian government and opposition Parliamentarians agreed a truce that stopped the police clearing the square. Unfortunately the UIA and Right Sector saw this as an opportunity to open fire on and take hostage members of the police. This of course forced the police to return fire under the universal principle of self-defence.
On Friday (20/2/14) The Ukrainian government, opposition Parliamentarians and representatives of the European Union (EU) brokered a transition of power agreement that would have seen Ukraine revert to the 2004 version of its constitution, a government of national unity formed and fresh elections held in December 2014. To further defuse the situation Ukraine's President Vicktor Yanukovych left Kiev for Crimea. The idea being that if the UIA and Right Sector were given the small victory of seizing the Presidential compound they would calm down and not bother advance outside of the capital. Unfortunately Yanukovych then lost his nerve and fled Ukraine entirely.
Without a voice to counter them the UIA and Right Sector aligned with Yulia Tymoshenko's hopelessly corrupt Fatherland party and arbitrarily declared themselves the government of Ukraine. However as the Parliament lacks the legal power to make that decision for the purposes of international law Vicktor Yanukovych remains the President of Ukraine. Almost immediately after seizing the Parliament building the UIA and Right Sector launched into an aggressive series of policies designed to remove all trace of Russian/Slavic culture from Ukraine. For example they banned the speaking of Russian in public life and began tearing down buildings and statues that were put up during the time of the Soviet Union. Most alarmingly yesterday (1/3/14) Dmitry Yarosh the leader of Right Sector and self-proclaimed Deputy Minister for National Security and Defence publicly called on Chechen Islamist leader Doku Umarov to intensify his campaign of terrorist attacks against Russia civilians.
More worrying then their rhetoric the Ukrainian opposition have disbanded the Berkut police division and forced - at gunpoint - its members to kneel in front of a baying mob in Independence Square so the crowd could throw rocks and spit on them. They have also set about gutting the leadership of the Ukrainian military of Russian/Slavic members and replacing them with people sympathetic to the nationalist cause. This creates a very real worry that the UIA and Right Sector are preparing to use military force to impose their extreme neo-Nazi views on the eastern Ukrainians who simply don't want them.
In response people in eastern Ukraine - particularly Crimea - have completely disregarded declarations from Kiev so rather then disbanding the Berkut they've actually been strengthening them. Also they have declared the autonomous Crimean Parliament as the government of Ukraine which legally has about the same level of credibility as the similar declaration from Kiev. Most worryingly they have been holding large protests against Kiev and starting forming militias to protect themselves should Kiev launch an attack. With reports that UIA and Right Sector militias from Kiev are starting to head east this creates a very real possibility of events such as those seen in Xinjiang, China where thugs armed with knives attacked crowds at a railway station killing 30 and wounding over 130 occurring in Ukraine ultimately plunging the nation into civil war.
Fortunately Russia has moved swiftly to calm the situation. On Friday (18/2/14) they deployed Marines on the streets of Crimea will the full permission of the Ukrainian government in Crimea and of Ukrainian President Yanukovych. On Saturday (1/3/14) this deployment was authorised by the Russian Parliament. This force with is said to be as high as 15,000 strong has a very powerful deterrent effect. Firstly it deters the Ukrainian government in Kiev from making any aggressive moves that will inflame the situation. Secondly it allows the people of eastern Ukrainian feel that they are protected from the UIA and Right Sector. This deters them from forming militias of their own which should keep the situation under control because highly trained Russian Marines will behave far more professionally then a rag-tag militia.
The way that the Russians have gone about deploying this peacekeeping force is highly amusing though. Firstly the although uniformed the Marines are not flying any flag nor displaying any insignia. As a result if war were to break out and they became engaged in combat they would be considered unlawful combatants under the Geneva Conventions. Secondly the absence of a Ukrainian government creates all sorts of questions about whether the presence of foreign troops undermines Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial independence. These questions are of massive importance in discussions at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) about the conflicts in Syria and Libya where western nations led by the US seem to have absolutely no problem with unlawful combatants undermining a nation's sovereignty territorial integrity.
It is the posing of these wider questions rather then the presence of Russian troops that has got western members of the UNSC so angry because firstly it highlights their hypocrisy over Syria and Libya and secondly it underlines that what is going on in Ukraine is far from the popular, pro-democracy revolution they like to pretend it is. The only worry is that being a weak man US President Obama will ratchet up the rhetoric in an effort to appear tough and that will inflame the situation to the point where the rather naive Ukrainian government in Kiev do something stupid.
12:45 on 2/3/14 (UK date).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
