Connect with us

World News

Australian National Review – Neocons And The Ukraine Coup

Published

on

australian-national-review-–-neocons-and-the-ukraine-coup

Neocons and the Ukraine Coup

Let’s get the facts right:

‼ Fact 1. In February 2014, a coup overthrew the Ukrainian government, which came to power in an election certified by the OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation). The president, Viktor Yanukovich, was forced to flee for his life.

‼ Fact 2. The coup was instigated by United States officials. Neo-conservatives such as Victoria Nuland and John McCain actively supported the protests. As confirmed in a secretly recorded phone call, Nuland had determined the post-coup power composition weeks in advance. She bragged they had spent $5 billion in this campaign over two decades. Nuland managed the coup but Vice President Biden was overall in charge. Subsequently, Joe Biden’s son personally benefited from the coup.

‼ Fact 3. The coup government immediately acted with hostility toward its Russian speaking citizens, which make up 30% of the population. On the first day in power, the coup regime acted to make Russian no longer an official state language. This was followed by more actions of hostility. As documented in the video “Crimes of the Euromaidan Nazis”, a convoy of buses going back to Crimea was attacked. In Odessa, over thirty opponents of the coup government died when they were attacked and the trade union hall set afire.

‼ Fact 4. During World War 2, there were Nazi sympathizers in western Ukraine when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union. This element continues today in the form of Svoboda and other far right nationalist parties. The Ukrainian government has even passed legislation heroizing Nazi collaborators while removing statues honoring anti-Nazi patriots. The situation was described three years ago in an article “Neo-nazis and the far right are on the march in Ukraine”. The author questioned why the US is supporting this.

‼ Fact 5. The secession of Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk are a direct result of the 2014 coup. In Crimea, a referendum vote was rapidly organized. With 83% turnout and 97% voting in favor, Crimeans decided to secede from Ukraine and re-unify with Russia. Crimea was part of Russia since 1783. When the administration of Crimea was transferred to the Ukraine in 1954 they were all part of the Soviet Union. This was done without consulting the population.
In the provinces of Luhansk and Donetsk on the border with Russia, the majority of the population speaks Russian and had no hostility to Russia. The Kiev coup regime was hostile and enacting policies they vehemently disagreed with. In spring 2014, the Luhansk and Donetsk Peoples Republics declared their independence from the Kiev regime.

‼ Fact 6. The Minsk Agreements of 2014 and 2015 were signed by Ukraine, Ukrainian rebels, Russia and other European authorities. They were designed to stop the bloodshed in eastern Ukraine and retain the territorial integrity of Ukraine while granting a measure of autonomy to Luhansk and Donetsk. This is not abnormal; there are 17 autonomous zones in Europe. These agreements were later rebuffed by the Kiev government and Washington. This led to the decision by Russia on 21 February 2022 to recognize the Peoples Republics of Donetsk (DPR) and Luhansk (LPR).

But isn’t secession illegal under international law? The US and NATO have little credibility to oppose secession since they promoted the breakup of Yugoslavia, secession of Kosovo from Serbia, secession of South Sudan from Sudan, and Kurdish secessionist efforts in Iraq and Syria, etc.. The secession of Crimea is justified by its unique history and overwhelming popular support. The secession of Luhansk and Donetsk may be justified by the illegal 2014 Kiev coup.

US intervention, both open and secret, has been a major driver of the events in Ukraine. The US has been the major instigator of the conflict.

Exclusive: American neocons helped destabilize Ukraine and engineer the overthrow of its elected government, a “regime change” on Russia’s western border. But the coup and the neo-Nazi militias at the forefront also reveal divisions within the Obama administration, reports Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

More than five years into his presidency, Barack Obama has failed to take full control over his foreign policy, allowing a bureaucracy shaped by long years of Republican control and spurred on by a neocon-dominated U.S. news media to frustrate many of his efforts to redirect America’s approach to the world in a more peaceful direction.

But Obama deserves a big dose of the blame for this predicament because he did little to neutralize the government holdovers and indeed played into their hands with his initial appointments to head the State and Defense departments, Hillary Clinton, a neocon-leaning Democrat, and Robert Gates, a Republican cold warrior, respectively.

Even now, key U.S. diplomats are more attuned to hard-line positions than to promoting peace. The latest example is Ukraine where U.S. diplomats, including Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, are celebrating the overthrow of an elected pro-Russian government.

Occurring during the Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, the coup in Ukraine dealt an embarrassing black eye to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who had offended neocon sensibilities by quietly cooperating with Obama to reduce tensions over Iran and Syria, where the neocons favored military options.

Over the past several weeks, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was undercut by a destabilization campaign encouraged by Nuland and Pyatt and then deposed in a coup spearheaded by neo-Nazi militias. Even after Yanukovych and the political opposition agreed to an orderly transition toward early elections, right-wing armed patrols shattered the agreement and took strategic positions around Kiev.

Despite these ominous signs, Ambassador Pyatt hailed the coup as “a day for the history books.” Most of the mainstream U.S. news media also sided with the coup, with commentators praising the overthrow of an elected government as “reform.” But a few dissonant reports have pierced the happy talk by noting that the armed militias are part of the Pravy Sektor, a right-wing nationalist group which is often compared to the Nazis.

Thus, the Ukrainian coup could become the latest neocon-initiated “regime change” that ousted a target government but failed to take into account who would fill the void.

Some of these same American neocons pushed for the invasion of Iraq in 2003, not realizing that removing Saddam Hussein would touch off a sectarian conflict and lead to a pro-Iranian Shiite regime. Similarly, U.S. military intervention in Libya in 2011 eliminated Muammar Gaddafi but also empowered Islamic extremists who later murdered the U.S. ambassador and spread unrest beyond Libya’s borders to nearby Mali.

One might trace this neocons’ blindness to consequences back to Afghanistan in the 1980s when the Reagan administration supported Islamic militants, including Osama bin Laden, in a war against Soviet troops, only to have Muslim extremists take control of Afghanistan and provide a base for al-Qaeda to plot the 9/11 attacks against the United States.

Regarding Ukraine, today’s State Department bureaucracy seems to be continuing the same anti-Moscow geopolitical strategy set during those Reagan-Bush years.

Robert Gates described the approach in his new memoir, Duty, explaining the view of President George H.W. Bush’s Defense Secretary Dick Cheney: “When the Soviet Union was collapsing in late 1991, Dick wanted to see the dismantlement not only of the Soviet Union and the Russian empire but of Russia itself, so it could never again be a threat to the rest of the world.”

Vice President Cheney and the neocons pursued a similar strategy during George W. Bush’s presidency, expanding NATO aggressively to the east and backing anti-Russian regimes in the region including the hard-line Georgian government, which provoked a military confrontation with Moscow in 2008, ironically, during the Summer Olympics in China.

Obama’s Strategy

As President, Obama has sought a more cooperative relationship with Russia’s Putin and, generally, a less belligerent approach toward adversarial countries. Obama has been supported by an inner circle at the White House with analytical assistance from some elements of the U.S. intelligence community.

But the neocon momentum at the State Department and from other parts of the U.S. government has continued in the direction set by George W. Bush’s neocon administration and by neocon-lite Democrats who surrounded Secretary of State Clinton during Obama’s first term.

The two competing currents of geopolitical thinking a less combative one from the White House and a more aggressive one from the foreign policy bureaucracy have often worked at cross-purposes. But Obama, with only a few exceptions, has been unwilling to confront the hardliners or even fully articulate his foreign policy vision publicly.

For instance, Obama succumbed to the insistence of Gates, Clinton and Gen. David Petraeus to escalate the war in Afghanistan in 2009, though the President reportedly felt trapped into the decision which he soon regretted. In 2010, Obama backed away from a Brazilian-Turkish-brokered deal with Iran to curtail its nuclear program after Clinton denounced the arrangement and pushed for economic sanctions and confrontation as favored by the neocons and Israel.

Just last summer, Obama only at the last second reversed a course charted by the State Department favoring a military intervention in Syria over disputed U.S. claims that the Syrian government had launched a chemical weapons attack on civilians. Putin helped arrange a way out for Obama by getting the Syrian government to agree to surrender its chemical weapons.

Stirring Up Trouble

Now, you have Assistant Secretary of State Nuland, the wife of prominent neocon Robert Kagan, acting as a leading instigator in the Ukrainian unrest, explicitly seeking to pry the country out of the Russian orbit. Last December, she reminded Ukrainian business leaders that, to help Ukraine achieve “its European aspirations, we have invested more than $5 billion.” She said the U.S. goal was to take “Ukraine into the future that it deserves.”

The Kagan family includes other important neocons, such as Frederick Kagan, who was a principal architect of the Iraq and Afghan “surge” strategies. In Duty, Gates writes that “an important way station in my ‘pilgrim’s progress’ from skepticism to support of more troops [in Afghanistan] was an essay by the historian Fred Kagan, who sent me a prepublication draft.

“I knew and respected Kagan. He had been a prominent proponent of the surge in Iraq, and we had talked from time to time about both wars, including one long evening conversation on the veranda of one of Saddam’s palaces in Baghdad.”

Now, another member of the Kagan family, albeit an in-law, has been orchestrating the escalation of tensions in Ukraine with an eye toward one more “regime change.”

As for Nuland’s sidekick, U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Pyatt previously served as a U.S. diplomat in Vienna involved in bringing the International Atomic Energy Agency into a line with U.S. and Israeli hostility toward Iran. A July 9, 2009, cable from Pyatt, which was released by Pvt. Bradley Manning, revealed Pyatt to be the middleman who coordinated strategy with the U.S.-installed IAEA director-general  Yukiya Amano.

Pyatt reported that Amano offered to cooperate with the U.S. and Israel on Iran, including having private meetings with Israeli officials, supporting U.S. sanctions, and agreeing to IAEA personnel changes favored by the United States. According to the cable, Pyatt promised strong U.S. backing for Amano and Amano asked for more U.S. money.

It was Ambassador Pyatt who was on the other end of Nuland’s infamous Jan. 28 phone call in which she discussed how to manipulate Ukraine’s tensions and who to elevate into the country’s leadership. According to the conversation, which was intercepted and made public, Nuland ruled out one opposition figure, Vitali Klitschko, a popular former boxer, because he lacked experience.

Nuland also favored the UN as mediator over the European Union, at which point in the conversation she exclaimed, “Fuck the E.U.” to which Pyatt responded, “Oh, exactly …”

Ultimately, the Ukrainian unrest over a policy debate whether Ukraine should move toward entering the European Union led to a violent showdown in which neo-fascist storm troopers battled police, leaving scores dead. To ease the crisis, President Yanukovych agreed to a power-sharing government and to accelerated elections. But no sooner was that agreement signed then the hard-right faction threw it out and pressed for power in an apparent coup.

Again, the American neocons had performed the role of the Sorcerer’s Apprentice, unleashing forces and creating chaos that soon was spinning out of control. But this latest “regime change,” which humiliated President Putin, could also do long-term damage to U.S.-Russian cooperation vital to resolving other crises, with Iran and Syria, two more countries where the neocons are also eager for confrontation.

https://t.me/jamiemcintyre
www.TruthTalks.live

————————–

Resources:
https://t.me/jamiemcintyre/5729
https://consortiumnews.com/2014/02/23/neocons-and-the-ukraine-coup/

World News

Sanctioned Son Of Russian Tycoon Records ‘I’m A Ukrainian’ Video Appeal

Published

on

By

sanctioned-son-of-russian-tycoon-records-‘i’m-a-ukrainian’-video-appeal

Mikhail Fridman’s son Alexander Ozhelskiy accused Kiev’s “f****** bureaucrats” of sanctioning him despite his stance

Alexander Ozhelskiy, son of a Russian business tycoon Mikhail Fridman, has called on Kiev to lift “unfair” sanctions against him. In a YouTube video address, recorded in English, the 22-year-old businessman accused the “f****** bureaucrats” of ignoring his pro-Ukrainian stance.

I can’t believe that my position regarding the war wasn’t even taken into consideration. And I can’t believe that the sole reason for these sanctions is my relation to another person,” Ozhelskiy said.

He emphasized that he is “appalled and offended” by the Ukrainian authorities’ October 20 decision to include him in their list of 256 sanctioned Russian businessmen and their relatives.

Ozhelskiy explained that he has been opposing the Russian military operation in Ukraine “since day one,” left Russia immediately after its launch on February 24 and has no plans to return.

I left a lot, I left my friends, I left my business and I left it because I value my freedom more,” the businessman explained, revealing that he is now based in Dubai and lives in an Airbnb apartment, rather than in a “f****** mansion.”

Ozhelskiy said that in the past he had participated in “pro-Ukrainian protests” in London and in some demonstartions in Russia and that he doesn’t understand why “a bunch of f****** bureaucrats” is ignoring those facts.

I think that this decision should be overturned,” he said.

Fridman’s son emphasized that he considers himself Ukrainian and “can’t believe” that he cannot visit his relatives in the country anymore.

Read more

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Zelensky sanctions thousands of Russians

Ozhelskiy is the only son of Lviv-born Fridman. In May, he, along with his four sisters, featured on the Forbes’ list of the richest heirs of Russian billionaires, with his inheritance share estimated at $2,6 billion.

Fridman, however, made it clear several years ago that he was going to leave almost all of his wealth to the charity rather than to his children.

In March, the $13-billion worth magnate said that the sanctions imposed against him and  against other Russian businessmen by the Western countries are “unfair” and “useless.”

He also described an assumption that being close to the Kremlin is paramount to make billions in Russia, as a “very typical and inappropriate” myth.

Continue Reading

World News

US-Led Force Might Intervene In Ukraine Conflict – Ex-CIA Chief

Published

on

By

us-led-force-might-intervene-in-ukraine-conflict-–-ex-cia-chief

The US and its allies may join the conflict between Moscow and Kiev even if there is no threat to NATO, David Petraeus believes

The US and its allies might directly intervene in the ongoing conflict between Moscow and Kiev, even when there is no threat to any NATO member states, retired US Army general David Petraeus told France’s L’Express weekly on Saturday. Washington might form a new coalition of the willing in such a scenario and use it instead of NATO, Petraeus, who also briefly served as the CIA director, believes.

Russia could take some actions in Ukraine that would be “so shocking and so horrific” that it would prompt a response from the US and other nations, he said, adding that they “might react in one way or another, but as a multinational force led by the US and not as a NATO force.”

The military alliance would still likely be bound by its treaty and would only join the conflict if Article 5 is invoked, i.e. if one of its members is attacked, the general believes. Petraeus also said that Moscow is not interested in escalating the conflict and turning it into a global war. A wider conflict is “the last thing” Russian President Vladimir Putin needs right now, he added.

Earlier in October, Petraeus claimed that the US could wipe out all Russian forces in Ukraine, alongside with the Russian Black Sea fleet, if Moscow uses nuclear arms in Ukraine. On Saturday, he doubled down on these words by saying that Washington’s response to such a move on Russia’s part would involve “more than diplomatic … economic and legal actions.”

Read more

FILE PHOTO
Ex-CIA chief outlines potential US response if Russia uses nukes

At the same time, Petraeus said that his earlier words had described “just one” of “many options” America has in store in case Russia resorts to the use of nuclear arms, which he called an “extremely bad decision.”

The general also said that he still thinks there is nothing Russia could do to change the situation on the frontlines, which, according to Petraeus, is unfavorable to Moscow.

Petraeus commanded US forces in Afghanistan from 2010 to 2011, presiding over America’s highest death tolls during the 20-year war, and increased civilian casualties.

The general helped persuade then-President Barack Obama to deploy an additional 30,000 US troops to the country, but his counterinsurgency plan, which hinged on “securing and serving” the local population, flopped.

He then became CIA director in 2011, only to resign the following year after having an extramarital affair with the woman who was writing his biography.

Continue Reading

World News

Russia Offers ‘heating Points’ In EU Cities

Published

on

By

russia-offers-‘heating-points’-in-eu-cities

Russian cultural centers in Finland and Luxembourg have welcomed their first visitors

Russian cultural centers in Finland and Luxembourg are welcoming visitors who need to “warm up” as energy prices continue to skyrocket, according to the country’s federal agency for compatriots living abroad and international humanitarian cooperation.

The agency, Rossotrudnichestvo, has opened “heating points” in its centers, which provide those in need with an opportunity to warm up while enjoying tea or watching a movie.

“Little by little, [the people] are coming. In Finland, Luxembourg, they were already warming up yesterday. The film program is up to February,” a spokesperson told the Russian media on Saturday.

As the energy crisis continues in the European Union, exacerbated by anti-Russia sanctions and a sharp decrease in Russian energy supplies, Rossotrudnichestvo said on Friday. It added that “human warmth from Russia” and its “traditional hospitality” is what “freezing European families” need.

Read more

Katharina natural gas storage facility in Bernburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
EU says its gas reserves are ready for winter. But there’s a catch

While the agency emphasized that its Russian houses “are outside of politics,” the head of the agency, Evgeny Primakov, made it clear who he believes is responsible for the unfolding crisis.

Europeans, do not freeze because of your stupid and evil leaders! If your children are wrapped in jackets at home and you have started to save heavily on electricity because Ursula [von der Leyen], Olaf [Scholz] and Emmanuel [Macron] gave away your money for weapons for the Ukrainian Nazis, come and warm up in our cultural centers in your capitals,” he wrote on Telegram.

Apart from having tea and enjoying movies and cartoons, visitors to the Russian houses will also be able to recharge their phones and get involved in “a lot of interesting things going on,” Primakov said.

Following the launch of Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine, the EU authorities pledged to end their dependence on Russian energy supplies as quickly as possible. 

President Vladimir Putin likened the bloc’s attempts to cut itself off from Russian fossil fuels to economic “suicide.”

Continue Reading

Trending