Angela Merkle Confesses To German And French Deceit



Why the Minsk Agreement between Ukraine and Russia Failed

Comment by Christopher King
On 7 December 2022 in an interview with Zeit, Angela Merkle, former Chancellor of Germany said that the Minsk Agreement with Russia was intended to give Ukraine the time to arm and become militarily stronger.  In supporting this, the mediators, Germany and France colluded with the murders of demonstrators and police as a means of commencing the USA's 2014 Kiev coup.  They necessarily also supported the Kiev government's murder of its own people in its civil war on the Donbass provinces that did not accept the coup since they sat for eight years deceiving President Putin while that war continued. 

The public purpose of the Minsk Agreement was to achieve a cease-fire in the civil war between Kiev and the Russian-supported Donbass region with negotiated autonomy for that region within Ukraine.  That was a false intention for Ukraine, Germany and France who did not negotiate in good faith.

Ms Merkle should explain how Germany and France came to collude with murder in the Ukraine when four years earlier on 18/19 October 2010 she and Nicolas Sarkozy on behalf of the EU agreed with Dimitry Medvedev for Russia the "...strategic vision of a common space founded on the values of democracy, the rule of law and in which there would be free movement of people, goods, services and capital".

The German Government should also explain why it has removed from internet access the archived document released by the participants summarizing that meeting on 18/19 October 2010 at Deauville when it was available from a link on this website until 12 July 2022.  The text of this document is shown at Appendix item 2 below.

Angela Merkle’s confession means that President Putin persisted in good faith for eight years to avoid war by pressing to implement the Minsk Agreement.  That would have achieved a good outcome for Ukraine and the Donbass but the Kiev government and the mediators from France and Germany deceived him.  Further, the USA and the leaders of those European countries that sent weapons were aware of it.  In my previous article of 2nd December 2022 I included a letter from the UK Minister for the Armed Forces to my Member of Parliament in response to my suggestion to de-escalate this conflict.  It is inserted again for convenience below as Appendix item 1. 

The UK Minister says, in short, that President Putin is an aggressor and has never negotiated in good faith.  What shall I say of it?  Does the Minister know the truth and is lying?  Are the UK’s security services incompetent and misinforming him?  Does he have faith in the USA’s fantasy rationale of bringing benefits to people all over the world by bombing, shooting and assassinating them?  There is an excellent case for saying that the Minister and the UK Parliament are totally incompetent and a grave danger to the UK’s population and to Europe since the UK leads the USA’s war on Russia as Boris Johnson recently boasted.

With whom can Russia negotiate after Ms Merkle’s revelation?  What guarantees can Ukraine, the NATO countries or the USA give that any treaty has value or even that they negotiate in good faith?  Reuters makes this point.  Can any country be confident in negotiating with France or Germany?  With any European country?  I noted in my article of 2nd December 2022 that Boris Johnson had persuaded the Ukrainian side to continue the war rather than make agreement with Russia in their last Istanbul negotiations - and was paid £276,000 by the USA for doing so.  Is this the new American diplomacy or has it always been the case? 

The evidence is that the USA and its subverted European leaders within NATO have always wanted a war with Russia.  The Russians believe that the UK bombed the Nord Stream pipelines and they are probably right but it does not matter.  USA President Biden said plainly that he would stop Nord Stream and he or his proxy has done so.  If this was an honourable, helpful thing to Ukraine and Europe, why does the country that did it not tell us?  Why act in secret?   The truth is that it was a shameful thing to do, a provocation to Russia and a means of intensifying NATO's war against Russia. 

Shutting down Nord Stream also predictably weakens Europe.  This furthers the takeover agenda of the USA's military-globalist cabal of the super-rich, the USA's political patrons.  Two of these, Bill Gates and Rupert Murdoch, are Boris Johnson's patrons; Murdoch appears to have been patron to Tony Blair in his promotion of the Iraq war and his friend until Blair stayed overnight with Murdoch's wife. 

There is a feeling of insanity, that is, detachment from reality now in Europe as if the 1939-45 war never happened.  The objective since the USA moved NATO  eastward, after it had agreed not to move one inch eastward, has been the war with Russia that we now have.  Europe does not seem to notice the danger of this war and its intentional continuation by the USA paying Boris Johnson to sabotage the possibility of an agreement. 

France and Germany now have the war that they wanted.  How does their exercise in deceit look?  We have Ukraine’s economy and infrastructure in ruins, large areas of Ukraine now part of Russia, Western Europe’s economies crashing, rising interest rates, rapidly rising prices, a cold population, real hardship and hunger beginning, probable social unrest, the de-industrialization of Germany as well as other countries.  Our governments are promising that conditions will get better.  That is not possible.  It is the usual government nonsense to avoid confronting immediate problems and their causes.  It is not possible for the obvious reason that NATO is conducting a war on Russia and conditions can only get worse while it continues.  Even given cessation of hostilities conditions will not get better.  Russia has no grounds for trusting Western Europe, much less the USA.  It has become in Russia’s interests to withhold trade with Europe, to trade with Asia and unaligned countries and to let Europe sink into poverty, disorder and pre-industrial status of its own making.

Europe now has a predictable trend of declining long term economic performance probably absolute but certainly relative to other developing countries such as India and China.  Sanctions are helping the USA, having no effect on Russia and gravely damaging Western Europe.  While Europe is engaged in destroying its own economy and reputation, China, India and SE Asia generally are benefiting from Russia’s re-orientation eastward.  Pakistan and Iran are making deals with Russia; Saudi Arabia has an oil deal with China.  Payment systems are moving away from Swift, the dollar and will move from the Euro to using national currencies, gold and alternatives to Swift that already exist.  The pound sterling’s long term decline continues.  Every year of Europe’s preoccupation with the Ukraine war and economic decline/stagnation means another year of Asian development and capture of markets and resources.  This war has diverted Western Europe out of the mainstream of world economic development. 

The first lines of Sun Tsu’s The Art of War are:

        The art of war is of vital importance to the State.

        It is a matter of life or death, a road either to prosperity or to ruin.  Hence
        it is a subject of inquiry that can on no account be neglected.

It is evident from our present experience that Europe’s leaders have no conception whatever of the nature of war in either cultural or economic terms.  The lessons of two devastating European wars as well as the consequences of their Middle Eastern wars have passed them by.  Europe’s economic decline is the cost for pursuing a Russia policy that makes no sense.  No benefit to Europe can possibly come from it.  The idea of asserting Ukrainian sovereignty by a long war is senseless when the Minsk agreement was a means to ending hostilities and keeping the Donbass within Ukraine in 2015.  The ostensible NATO objective will now be re-taking the Donbass if not Crimea.  That will be extremely difficult if not impossible.  The real objective has always been to damage Russia.

As Jens Stoltenberg, NATO Secretary General has discerned, there is the possibility of the war over-spilling into wider Europe.  That is a certainty if it continues.  The USA is pressing for Mr Stoltenberg’s successor to be Christia Freeland, who is a Canadian of Ukrainian descent, as its frontsperson for getting NATO into direct war against Russia. 

One must ask why the EU did not continue with the plan for economic integration with Russia that Angela Merkle and Nicolas Sarkozy agreed with Dimitry Medvedev at Deauville in 2010.  The only subsequent hint has been that Mr Medvedev is described by Western media as violently hating the West.  I have understood it to mean that, as Russian Premier and lead negotiator for that exercise, he feels betrayed by the EU for treating Russia as an enemy rather than as a cooperative partner.  It is also an indication that Mr Medvedev acted in good faith, whereas his partners did not.  We have no information about how the USA induced Europe’s leaders to act against Russia when the rewards in cooperation with Russia were enormous.  Were financial bribes employed as in the cases of Tony Blair and Boris Johnson or threats? 

Perhaps Mr Medvedev could give his viewpoint on why the Deauville agreement of 18/19 October 2010 failed.  It would be instructive to Europe at this time.  The removal of the Deauville Agreement summary by the German government from its web page is an attempt to blank out factual history.   We may be certain from this that lies and deception are involved, meaning that harm is intended.  The lies of those who authorised this cannot stand against the truth.  

Sun Tsu, who is required reading in every military academy, tells us:

        In war, better take a state intact than destroy it.  Better take an army, a
        regiment, a company intact than destroy them.

        It is not the supreme excellence to win one hundred battles in one hundred
        engagements.  The supreme excellence is to overcome the enemy without
        fighting.

That has been the USA’s strategy in taking over most of Europe with NATO, using it first in 1999 to attack Bosnia, then Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria to consolidate its influence - or collaborate in joint crimes if you prefer.  Nor is the conflict of the Bosnian war ended.  This is instructive in considering the Ukraine war.  Western Europe has been turned, against its own interests, to attack Russia in the interests of the USA-organized globalists.  The potential for a Europe-wide disaster, perhaps a non-recoverable disaster, is clear.

It is curious that Angela Merkle has chosen to mention, apparently casually, that the Minsk agreement was used to gain time to arm Ukraine for war.  Ms Merkle is a member of the Christian Democratic Party.  Christianity is our link to culture and I’ve mentioned previously that European culture is based on Jesus.  This is not clearly understood.  It counts.  Ms Merkle is a member of the Lutheran Church and as such believes that Jesus will return and take believers to heaven with him, a common Christian belief.  Away from the pressures of politics, retired and reflecting on her life, Ms Merkle is concerned about God and getting to heaven.  Her part in choosing war rather than peace for Ukraine in 2015 is a problem.  She has made a confession, almost certainly without realizing it as any analytical psychologist would recognize. 

Let’s give quick and doubtless contraversial consideration to the meaning of Ms Merkle’s confession.   We are examining murder and the roots of a potential nuclear war, so whether in good taste or not, this is highly relevant.  Wars commence in people's minds so that is the place to start.

Christian confession predates Freudian/Jungian psychological techniques.  It enables the individual to consciously recognize inappropriate behaviour against Christian criteria and change behaviour.  In the Roman Catholic church one confesses to a priest as to an analyst and, given true repentance and commitment to change, one is assured that God forgives.  It is a valuable procedure.  Ms Merkle has two difficulties.  Firstly, the Lutheran church does not practice formal confession.  One confesses privately direct to God.  Secondly, promoting warfare and consciously killing people is, as I have mentioned before, no different from murder.  The Catholics would call it a ‘mortal sin’ which is of a different order of wrong-doing from, say, stealing a car or money.  These can be forgiven or punished by well known legal or other means.  There is no-one able to forgive and no means for forgiving the extinguishment of a human life.  Heaven is a problem for Ms Merkle.

Ms Merkle has stepped outside her culture.  Killing another human signals chaos within any culture.  Ritualizing it by calling mass State killing a war, supposedly with legal rules, is an attempt to legitimize murder and maintain some order in European culture.  It is nevertheless as primitive an attempt to gain benefits by human sacrifice as in the cultures that sacrificed direct to their Gods.  Whether Jesus would be in agreement with it is open to question.  One can see how the murders of the Kiev coup are having far-reaching chaotic effects in European culture by our leaders colluding with them.   That was the USA's purpose.  (6 Jan 23:  I have made amendments to this paragraph to explain what I mean by ritualizing murder).

Ms Merkle is aware that her crime in helping to create the Ukraine war makes her achievement in attaining high office worthless.  She has used her office for collusion with the murders of the USA’s Kiev coup and the deception of the Minsk agreements to further warfare and possible devastation of Europe.  Thousands have already been killed who might have lived.  She has gravely damaged Germany and Europe as a whole at this point.  She has had a key role in creating the war between Europe and Russia when she had the opportunity to create a region of peace and prosperity between us with the 2010 Deauville Agreement.  We need Ms Merkle to tell us how the USA sabotaged implementing that Agreement. 

Ms Merkle feels that confession will help her and the Ukraine war situation and it does.  By knowing the truth we know that the European politicians do not negotiate in good faith, which helps in identifying means of ending the war.  

The best solution is for the UK and Europe to leave NATO. NATO had no purpose after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.  It demonstrably exists now only to serve the USA's destructive interests, not Europe's. Alternatively, the European countries might have the USA remove its military presence from their territories.  Russia will probably only accept material actions of this sort as security guarantees now that Europe and Ukraine have shown the world their deceit and subjection to the USA.  Who can respect or trust them?  Europe’s citizens have seen how Tony Blair and Boris Johnson have been bought for cash by the USA-military globalist complex.  It is they, the people, who need to change the behaviour of their leaders.

It should be obvious now that Europe needs Russia.  Russia does not need Europe.  While Europe’s governments spend huge amounts of money in damaging Ukraine and attempting to defeat Russia their increasingly impoverished citizens will be wondering what personal arrangements, using their taxes, their leaders have made for their own comfort and security.  They will wonder whether like Tony Blair, Boris Johnson and perhaps Angela Merkle, their leaders have been bought for cash and promises of protection by the United States.   The situation is passing out of the control of our subverted leaders.

Why do I not criticize President Putin, you might wonder.  I am analysing the cause of this war because it is only by understanding the cause that one can find a solution, as with a disease.  US and European leaders have always been clearly the cause.  They argue legal rights.  It is the universal human right to life that is relevant.  President Putin is reacting in the same terms as have been presented to him.  I have suggested strategies that might have been adopted by the UK and Russian governments respectively.  The UK government specifically dismissed my suggestion.  I do not know whether President Putin saw the suggestion in my article of 2nd December, but Ms Merkle’s confession a few days later indicates that it would not be successful.  Paper agreements are probably no longer acceptable to Russia.  Facts on the ground are necessary, preferably Europe's exit from NATO, to obtain its independence and rely on its unique culture and history. 

The USA is always preaching about bringing freedom to the countries that it invades and occupies.  Europe needs freedom by getting rid of occupation by the USA.

There is a point about the Russians that the USA does not understand and Europeans should.  The Russians take warfare seriously.  Think Battle of Kursk when they shattered the main German army despite huge losses and Stalingrad when they froze to death at their posts, ate the dogs, cats and rats and it is said, human flesh to stop the Germans.  With total commitment they moved their factories bodily to locations behind the Urals.  The conceit that the USA defeated Germany is ridiculous.  Russia is under attack again.  This is a very unwise war.

Europe’s leaders do not recognize the source of the culture that they are abandoning.  Our culture has come a long way and has given the world incredible benefits.   Our present leaders are not the people to take us further.  We need leaders of goodwill.


19 December 2022
 
Appendix

Appendix Item 1.


Ministry of Defence

JAMES HEAPPEY MP
MINISTER FOR THE ARMED FORCES

Our ref: D/Min(AF)/JH MC2022/03391e

Your ref: CP42780

MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
FLOOR 5, ZONE B, MAIN BUILDING
WHITEHALL LONDON SW1A 2HB

Telephone 020 7218 9000 (Switchboard)

March 2022

Thank you for your email of 11 March 2022 on behalf of your constituent Christopher
King of (address deleted), suggesting an alternative approach
to de-escalating the war in Ukraine. Mr King has asked we consider the strategy that
President Kennedy adopted to de-escalate the Cuban Missile Crisis by ignoring
differences and negatives and concentrating on what positive actions were possible.
He suggests that a positive morally based approach should be used.

Putin's assault on Ukraine is an unprovoked, premeditated attack against a sovereign
democratic state. Never serious about engaging in diplomacy - focussed only on deceit
and furthering territorial ambitions - the Russian Government has lied to the world and
to their own people. The UK and our allies will hold the Russian Government to account.
We stand with Ukraine and will always defend the Ukrainian people's right to choose
their own destiny.

Though the UK and our allies tried every avenue for diplomacy until the final hour, we
conclude Russia was never serious about engaging in diplomacy. Putin was always
determined to attack his neighbour, no matter what we did.

Throughout this crisis, NATO, individual Allies, and our partners have made every effort
to pursue diplomacy and dialogue with Russia, including at the highest levels, and made
many substantive proposals to enhance the security of all nations in the Euro Atlantic
region. NATO has repeatedly invited Russia to talks in the NATO-Russia Council.
Russia has still not reciprocated. It is Russia, and Russia alone, which has chosen
escalation.

Putin has denied that Ukraine has any "tradition of genuine statehood", claimed that it
posed a "direct threat to the security of Russia", and hurled numerous other false
accusations and aspersions. This position is entirely unacceptable and breaks
fundamental tenets of international law. We call on the Russian Government to halt its
aggression now, withdraw its forces and abide by the international commitments it
signed up to freely.

Chris Philp MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA

(page break)

Please reassure your constituent that we and our NATO Allies are ready for substantive
discussions in good faith with Russia. This dialogue would cover what Russia says it
wants, from strategic nuclear weapons and force posture, to exercises and incidents at
sea. This is a serious offer which would improve European security for Russia and
NATO. But these talks must be based on de-escalation and an end to aggression
against Ukraine. Our channels of communication with Russia remain open, including
through embassy staffs in London and Moscow. The means through which we can
conduct dialogue exist, but it is Russia's willingness to conduct meaningful dialogue
which remains the issue
.
We will continue to support the Ukrainian Government in the face of this assault on their
sovereignty and territorial integrity with this unprecedented national and international
response.

I hope this response reassures your constituent of the work the UK Government and UK
Defence to de-escalate the conflict and ensure European security.

JAMES HEAPPEY MP



Appendix Item 2

Click HERE <https://archiv.bundesregierung.de/resource/blob/656928/478604/81cb5f72d691edace00d9e33c67c5a27/2010-10-19-erklaerung-gipfeltreffen-deauville-eng-data.pdf> for link to the archived document.

https://archiv.bundesregierung.de/resource/blob/656928/478604/81cb5f72d691edace00d9e33c67c5a27/2010-10-19-erklaerung-gipfeltreffen-deauville-eng-data.pdf

NOTE:  This document has been removed by the German government from its web page subsequent to 12 July 2022, the date on which my first article containing it was posted.  The text below is the statement released as an account of this meeting.  The italics in the centre of the document are mine, added for emphasis.  All other text including the heading is complete and accurate.

Statement for the France-Germany-Russia Summit in Deauville

(18-19 October 2010)
(final)

The President of the French Republic, the President of the Russian Federation and the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany met in Deauville yesterday and today to conduct in-depth exchanges on a number of international issues of common interest.

Regarding the G20 and the G8, Germany and Russia welcomed the ambition of the next French Presidency to strengthen the role of these key bodies in defining and implementing concrete responses to the global challenges facing the world.

Regarding the Middle East, France, Germany and Russia urge Israel to make efforts to ensure the continuation and success of the peace negotiations, as they urge the Palestinians, in this context, to remain engaged in these negotiations. Our three countries support American efforts in this direction and are prepared to contribute actively to the peace process.

President Sarkozy, President Medvedev and Chancellor Merkel discussed Iran's nuclear programme and the measures taken by the international community. They called on Iran to comply with the requirements of the Security Council and the IAEA Board of Governors and recalled that the door to dialogue will be kept open so as to arrive at a negotiated solution to this issue.

[italics added] They confirm their commitment to enhance the strategic Russia-EU partnership. They expressed their support for the ongoing negotiations of the New EU-Russia Agreement, the implementation of the “Partnership for Modernization” initiative and cooperation in security and foreign policy matters. They looked forward to progress being made on common steps towards a visa-free travel regime at the EU-Russia Summit in December taking into account the offer presented by the EU. France, Germany and Russia subscribe to the strategic vision of a common space founded on the values of democracy, the rule of law and in which there would be free movement of people, goods, services and capital.

Proceeding from the principle that the security of all states in the Euro-Atlantic community is indivisible, President Sarkozy, President Medvedev and Chancellor Merkel reaffirm their commitment to work jointly on security in the Euro-Atlantic and Eurasian area. They stressed that the upcoming meeting of 56 leaders at the OSCE Astana Summit would be a significant opportunity for progressing towards this objective. They called for the strengthening of institutional and operational cooperation between Russia and the EU as well as in the NATO-Russia-Council in order to confront the common threats to our security. They agreed to explore possibilities for closer cooperation in very concrete ways that contribute to mutual confidence and facilitate collective action for crises prevention and management, i.e. in progressing towards a solution of the protracted conflicts such as Transnistria.

(End of document)