|
The EU U.S. Tug Over Ukraine Policy
Yesterday I doubted that a certain Obama administration “leak” to the New York Times was truthful:
While Merkel and other EU politicians seems to want to calm the situation down the White House feels domestic political pressure to do more of “something”. That is likely why we see this “leak” in today’s New York Times:
Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany told Mr. Obama by telephone on Sunday that after speaking with Mr. Putin she was not sure he was in touch with reality, people briefed on the call said. “In another world,” she said.
This does not sound like typically Merkel but rather strange for her. I doubt that she said that the way the “people briefed on the call” told it to the Times stenographer. It is rather an attempt to discredit Merkel and to make it more difficult for her to find a solution with Russia outside of U.S. control.
The German government, through the conservative, Merkel supporting daily Die Welt, denied the correctness of that quote. Die Welt writes (my translation):
The chancellery is unhappy about the report in the New York Times. Merkel by no means meant to express that Putin behaved irrational. In fact she told Obama that Putin has a different perspective about the Crimea [than Obama has].
No, I am no supporter or defender of Merkel, but the tug over the Ukraine is as much between the EU and the United States as it is between the “west” and the “east”. Yes, the EU screwed up its Ukraine strategy by giving an ultimatum to Yanukovich to sign an association agreement and, when he rejected, by instigating trouble in Kiev. But what the U.S. is doing is worse. It managed to sabotage the February 21 comprise three EU foreign minister had negotiated between Yanukovich and his opposition and ordered fascist storm troupers onto the Ukrainian parliament to press it to illegally “elect” its favorite candidate to head the Ukraine. Six members of the fascists Bandera follower party Svoboda are now part of the illegitimate Ukrainian government. Certain U.S. policymakers seem to want war with Russia. The Europeans have very different interests.
All favored comments below the Merkel piece in Die Welt are taking the Russian position in this conflict and point out the fascists in the Ukrainian government. This in a paper with a usually conservative and very pro-American readership. The German public, despite an anti-Russian propaganda campaign in most main-strem media, is certainly not on the side of the United States and its NATO interventionists.
There is a long “tradition” of using fascist nationalist groups against Russia. That country lost over 20 million people fighting fascism and for Russians to see fascists ruling in Kiev is therefore an incredible assault on their national identity. Russians know their history and they certainly know who is standing behind these fascists. That is likely what Merkel told Obama about Putin’s perspective.
The Svoboda and the RightSector in the Ukraine see themselves in the tradition of Stepan Bandera, a Galician ultranationalist, brutal terrorist, fascist and later asset of many “western” secret services. An eyeopening book by the U.S. National Archives about Hitler’s Shadows – Nazi War Criminals, U.S. Intelligence and the Cold War (pdf) includes a chapter on “Collaborators: Allied Intelligence and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists”. Some excerpts:
British operations through Bandera expanded. An early 1954 MI6 summary noted that, “the operational aspect of this [British] collaboration [with Bandera] was developing satisfactorily. Gradually a more complete control was obtained over infiltration operations and although the intelligence dividend was low it was considered worthwhile to proceed….”
…
Bandera was, according to his handlers, “a professional underground worker with a terrorist background and ruthless notions about the rules of the game…. A bandit type if you like, with a burning patriotism, which provides an ethical background and a justification for his banditry. No better and no worse than others of his kind…
…
In April 1959 Bandera again asked West German intelligence for support and this time Gehlen was interested. The CIA noted that, “It [is] apparent that Bandera [is] seeking support for illegal ops into Ukraine.” The West Germans agreed to support at least one such mission based on the “fact [that] Bandera and group no longer the cut throats they were” and because Bandera “supplied proof [of] existing contact with inside assets.” A team trained and funded by the BND crossed from Czechoslovakia in late July, and the BND promised Bandera support for future operations if this one were to be even “moderately successful.”
…
In June 1985 the General Accounting Office mentioned Lebed’s name in a public report on Nazis and collaborators who settled in the United States with help from U.S. intelligence agencies. The Office of Special Investigations (OSI) in the Department of Justice began investigating Lebed that year. The CIA worried that public scrutiny of Lebed would compromise QRPLUMB and that failure to protect Lebed would trigger outrage in the Ukrainian émigré community. It thus shielded Lebed by denying any connection between Lebed and the Nazis and by arguing that he was a Ukrainian freedom fighter. The truth, of course, was more complicated. As late as 1991 the CIA tried to dissuade OSI from approaching the German, Polish, and Soviet governments for war-related records related to the OUN. OSI eventually gave up the case, unable to procure definitive documents on Lebed. Mykola Lebed, Bandera’s wartime chief in Ukraine, died in 1998. He is buried in New Jersey, and his papers are located at the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard University.
There is little doubt that U.S. secret services and certain neo-con politicians are still pulling the strings of the fascist movements in the Ukraine. Who else would have trained them, as Putin alleges, in neighboring countries. It is their russophobia that is now threatening European peace.
Petri Krohn (40)
I personally think that that map is wrong in terms of “which regions will join/form the new independent state?”
In my opinion the members of the new state will basically be all regions along the Russian border and the black sea, startin in the north with Kharkov and down to Odessa, plus Dnipropetrovsk. While both Sumy in the North and Kirovograd, closer to kiev and with lower probability, might possibly be candidates, I don’t see them in the state, particularly Kirovograd; a mil unit not fighting against Crimea doesn’t equate to desiring to join the new state.
The new state that I, based on political preferences, ethnic constellations, and current events like requests to join, expect as realistic will have todays Kharkiv, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia, Kherson, Crimea, Mykolaiv, and Odessa regions, that is a total of 224.265 km² and ca 18 Mio citizens, or, incl. Dnipropetrovsk region, the only not outer region quite probably joining 256.179 km² and ca. 21.5 Mio citizens, which translates to roughly 40% of yesterdays ukraines area and ca. 45% of its citizens.
Which basically is a funny situation because, sure enough Putins desire was *not* to basically cut ukraine in half (and even less to “annect” that chunk). I think that Putin on one hand doesn’t particularly like the idea of that large (or even larger) a part of yesterdays ukraine falling away and creating a new state; on the other hand he will quite likely think sth. to the effect of “Well, if that’s how things turn out and what the people want than, well, be it, let them do their thing”.
Probably some out there will ask why the new state should take as much as it can get, in particular the, pro-Russian after all, northeastern border regions, and even more so when considering that not taking them in would translate to a strategic hole …
My point of view is that, well, first they are right in a way. But there are other factors, too. Unlike the wezt, Putin and Russia are simply not driven by get anything and all and as much as you ca possibly can get. Also, that whole zato thingy is largely a weztern issue; I don’t think that Russia *really* cares batshit about largely impotent zato missiles being stationed or not; and anyway, no matter what the frontier happens to be, zato will station their junk anyway, so this whole thing is largely a shifting question rather than a solution. Furthermore, zato needed to be fucking braindead (which the politicians are – but not the generals) to squeeze themselves in between Russia, the new extremely Russia friendly state and Belarussia.
Additonally, this should not be forgotten, this whole thing is, while by no means surprising, *not a Russian thing*, it’s a plain weztern created quagmire.
Also again, remember what I wrote about Putin (although it probably was overlooked in pile of greenwald, communist, nazi, holodomor and whatnot stuff). Putin is *not* anti Western or anti zusa or anti anything; that anti bla attitude is a weztern projection that in the end is based on divide et impera – not a Russian strategy …
ukraine, pro western, pro Russia, or pro antarctica is simply quite meaningless. For Putin ukraine was a neighbour, plain and simple. Having a severely sick neighbour is a bad thing. I’m quite certain that Putin preferred a healthy zeu-associated ukraine easily over a sick and internally broken ukraine. Of course, that’s theory because being associated with zeu is vreating sickness, no matter whether for eastern or western countries, while being associated with Russia has a tendency to pay off handsomely. But the point was that Putin respected ukraines souvereignty and wanted it to happily exist even if as a eu member.
Well, now that zusa/zeu have two wars running, one internal between themselves (and a third one between the zeu states to follow) and one external in ukraine, Putin *had* to do something to protect the ethnic Russians in ukraine who have a right to not suffer even worse for chruschevs and sovjet mistakes. *That* was his motivation.
*Of course* he could assume that, given the situation with nazis, Russia-haters and chaos in ukraine, most of the eastern regions would want to leave ukraine. Now what? Was he seriously supposed to tell them “Go, fuck yourselves!”? Of course not. Even as he never had the plan to split ukraine.
To put that again very clearly: The coming split was *not* Putins desire, quite the contrary. It is a direct consequence of zusas and zeus criminal attitude and mingling in a souvereign states internal affairs and their instigating and sponsoring of terrorists and criminals, both on the street and in the “new government”.
Accordingly, Putin will likely do the only sensible thing to do for anyone with any democratic attitude, he will nolens volens accept the declared and even bravely fought for will of the people. This should ring a bell with zamericans; but don’t hold your breath.
Finally I do think that Putin will actually try to persuade the pro-Russian regions to stay very modest and to *not* bring in all regions wishing to join them. Simply because wants rest-ukraine to stay and become again a viable state and not europes junkyard. Stripping away all regions who might want to join the new “crimean republic” would, however, so exactly that, it would leave ukraine as a republica moritura. And that’s not what Putin wants – after all, Putin isn’t a zamerican but a sentient and intelligent human being.
And mrs. merkel should very quickly reflect how smart – or not – it is to bow and pray to a fatally ill and rotten deamon and pissing in a healthy and strong bears garden, even more so when that bear basically has friendly feelings for Germany.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Mar 4 2014 19:08 utc | 49
Well, I would’t worry about the viability of the “Crimea State”. Not at all.
But … – Prognosis (updated) –
I basically see three scenarios
1) new state
In this scenario, largely explained above, possibly (though unlikely) with less or more regions joining, there would be a new state, centered around Crimea, of ca. 40-50% of the territory and citizens of yesterdays ukraine.
2) same as 1) but without statehood but rather some form of strongly enhanced autonomy and written down in the constitution to never join or otherwise cooperate with zato.
In this situation, ukraine would be basically forced to stay clean and to not play games because solution 1) would always be looming at the horizon.
And it would have the advantage of leaving ukraine as intact as it can possibly be after what the wezt did there.
Quite possibly the most attractive option for everyone except the Crimea and some other regions.
3) Something else, like Russia conquering ukraine completely.
Highly unlikely. I also basically see the diverse poland annects west ukraine in this category.
Which one it will be will largely depend on the wezts behaviour. The more zusa/zeu push or even threaten Russia, the more likely it will be 1). The more reasonable the wezt behaves and the more zusa confesses its failure and Russias right, the more likely 2) will be.
The reason why I see 1) as the most likely is not Russias supposed and implied interest but the fact, that zusa and zeu will almost certainly play games and threaten Russia with sanctions like they try since yesterday. While Putin is in no way anti-zusa or anti-zeu, it *is* in Russias interest to not tolerate any such negative approch against itself.
– Prognosis, part II –
What to do about kiev, lvov and other regions?
Obviously, Putin can simply chose the line “you broke it, now it’s your problem”. many think that’s what Putin will do. I’m not so sure.
Call me crazy but I see something completely different coming up. Something like:
On day X (quite probably very soon) …
– yanukovich (officially) returns to ukraine (namely Crimea)
– He has a declaration sent to kiev “government” which is also sent over TV to all ukrainians. Say at 9:00 in the morning.
in this declaration yanukovich declares that
– He will re-take his position
– He will hold elections very soon, maybe in May
– possibly that he himself will not join the election (read: he won’t go for another term). This might be very useful, maybe even
necessary to demonstrate that he is all about restoring democracy and a properly working state – and that it’s not about him wanting power.
– he gives the members of the illegal “new government” 6 hrs. to turn themselves in and to be brought to court; the same ultimatum also
concerns high officials of any kind who did support the criminals. They will all be charged, among others, with treason and an attack
on the constitution.
– he will be acting president only until a new government has been elected. And, if at all, he himself will take part in the elections
only, if, say in a referendum, a considerable part of the people suggest so.
– he demands all loyal and law abiding police units to arrest and jail any known active criminal nazis and other violent criminals.
Failure to do so will lead to being fired and possibly being brought to court.
– During the whole day (incognito) special forces will observe all leading government and agency officials closely.
– Minutes after the ultimatum *ukrainian* forces, possibly Berkut having been smuggled incognito to kiev, will arrest all high leven traitors and criminals (gov’ment, federal agencies, etc.)
– Loyal forces and Berkut will have all neccessary material (like helicopters) available, if needed borrowed by Russia.
– all government and major agency building as well as riot headquarters will be sealed off and very well guarded so as to protect evidence. Similar procedures will apply to residences and offices of known traitors and supporters.
– all zamericans and zeu agents will be arrested, declared personae non gratae, and sent out of ukraine. supporting “ngos” and similar crime agencies will be raided.
Within days full order and proper government will be restored, and evidence against zusa, zeu, and traitors will be published. Including, in particular evidence for concrete plans of the criminal “government” to loot and plunder and sell out ukraine to the wezt.
Then a referendum will be held, asking the ukrainians whether ukraine should join or associate with eu. A vast majority will vote “No”.
Any installations, bases, ngos and alike of zusa and zeu will be searched and closed. Only basic diplomatic presence will be allowed.
With a little luck, ukraine can stay intact, albeit at the cost of making major autonomy concessions to southern and eastern regions; Crimeas autonomy will also be enhanced up to the point of being ukrainian only in name.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Mar 4 2014 21:10 utc | 60
|
