The Guardian published a report on the recent NATO meeting, authored  by Ewen MacAskill and Shaun Walker (“Nato leaders cautiously welcome Ukraine ceasefire agreement“, 4 Sept 2014, see fascimile bellow). What caught my eye was a sentence in the middle of the article referring Poroshenko admitting “individual countries” arming Ukraine with high-precision weapons, this, despite”NATO was not arming Ukraine”. Who, those ‘individual countries’ then might be?  Later, coinciding with the spread done by @Professorsblogg on Twitter pointing to that specific formulation, the Guardian changed its version, as discussed in section V below.

By Prof Marcello Ferrada de Noli

I

Inferring form the Guardian text (reproducing or based on Porochenko’s declarations) on that:

A. “NATO is not arming Ukraine”, one interpretation i had was that the “individual country” had to be a one not being member of the alliance. Secondly, based on that:

B. The kind of weaponry the “individual country (countries)” are providing Ukraine, according to Poroshenko, is of specific tech kind (“high-precision weapons“) one natural inference would be, “a non-NATO country manufacturing high precision weapons”.

 

And this lead to my Sweden-hypothesis. For which I asked Foreign Minister Carl Bild on Twitter:

In fact, Gurrali’s table reinforced my believe on that Sweden is arming Ukraine, for among those countries only Sweden meet BOTH criteria of:

a) advanced technology and manufacturing of high-precision weapons,

b) Manifestly, open support to Ukraine in the use of force to destroy “the separatists”

c) Known as notable world weapons exporter

 

II

Twitter went wild on diverse interpretations on the question who the individual countries referred in that fashion by Posoroshenko. Girall wondered if Poroshenko meant, “individual NATO countries”:

To which I replied that the Guardian information did not necessarily implied “individual NATO countries”, rather, what it clearly said was “NATO countries are NOT arming Ukraine”. Of course, those either lines from Poroshenko, or from the Guardian. Reality could be another one, if individual NATO countries are in secret providing those weapons to Ukraine. And in his case, plainly deceiving the world:

III

I third aspect is that Sweden has been markedly profiling it self as the EU country which most vehemently advocates for the use of force in Ukraine, to curve the rebels:

IV

Sweden known as notable world weapons exporter

Further details, figs., etc. in “Are corporations linked to weapon-export industry behind ‘individual countries’ US & Sweden, instigating war in Ukraine?“

V

The Guardian has now changed its version on what was said by Poroshenko. Amazing!

This new version, stressing at least ONE COUNTRY in the context of NATO, would exclude non-members countries as Sweden? It is hard to find the right answer, since neither the Guardian or Porishenko wish to detail the information. So. obvious question are: which country are they covering? Where Poroshenko, NATO and the Guardian wish – in their propaganda war – lead the attention of the public? Which is the country they really want to save after the indiscretion of Poroshenko?

The main thing, the horrible thing, is that such weapons supply from the “West” is now a concrete truth, while, as expressed introduction, there is “zero evidence of Russia arming the Rebels,