You really believe that people have no memory. Or maybe YOU have amnesia... Brendan Devenney -
The Nazi Element in Ukraine
Post World War 2, until at least 1970, the CIA used various far right pro-Hitler, antisemitic Ukrainian groups, including the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (the leader of one being Stepan Bandera of OUN-B) to create dissent in Soviet Ukraine.
Svoboda and Right Sector claim to be the modern day inheritors of the OUN's political traditions.
https://cryptome.org/2016/01/cia-ua-aerodynamic.pdf? fbclid=IwAR2QzEDaO25PvnZaM385Kru2ItOMeXsXUN7767oBO_vhf1e-E8Y4TZR5Ykc
Declassified CIA documents describe Project Aerodynamic in the 1950s and ’60s that recruited Ukrainian nationalists – including Nazis and war criminals such as Mykola Lebed (OUN-B leader) who was accused of killing tens of thousands of Poles and Jews – to work against the USSR.
(Wiki)
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/AERODYNAMIC%20%20%20VOL. %205%20%20%28DEVELOPMENT%20AND%20PLANS%29_0004.pdf
The hyper-nationalist Ukrainian-Israeli billionaire Ihor Kolomoysky, a friend of the Obama White House and employer of Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden, is a major donor to far-right Ukrainian causes. He sides with the followers of Stepan Bandera, the pro- Nazi Ukrainian leader whom Hitler ditched when Bandera made clear that he wanted Ukraine to be nazi but independent of Germany’s Nazi Party. Briefly, Bandera’s #2 in command, Yaroslav Stetsko, led nazi Ukraine, and approved the slaughter of thousands of Jews there. He clearly stated his view, that:
“Moscow and Jewry are Ukraine’s greatest enemies and bearers of corruptive Bolshevik international ideas. Although I consider Moscow, which is in fact Ukraine held in captivity, and not Jewry, to be the main and decisive enemy, I nonetheless fully appreciate the undeniably harmful and hostile role of the Jews, who are helping Moscow to enslave Ukraine. I therefore support the destruction of the Jews.”
https://www.academia.edu/2469365/ The_Organization_of_Ukrainian_Nationalists_and_Its_Attitude_toward_Germans_and_J ews
http://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-russian-jewish-leader-says-ukraine-oligarch-should- be-hanged/
https://rinf.com/alt-news/editorials/jewish-billionaire-finances-ukraines-aydar-ss-nazi- troops/
Kolomoyski is a prominent supporter of Ukraine’s Jewish community and the president of the United Jewish Community of Ukraine. In 2010 he was appointed as the president of the European Council of Jewish Communities after promising the outgoing president he would donate $14 million...After several ECJC board members resigned in protest, Kolomyski quit the ECJC and, together with fellow Ukrainian oligarch Vadim Rabinovich, founded the European Jewish Union.”
(Wiki)
Historians blame the UIA and other Ukrainian fascist forces for the extermination of thousands of Poles and Jews during World War II as these right-wing Ukrainian paramilitaries sided with the German Nazis in their fight against the Soviet Union’s Red Army. Svoboda and the Right Sektor have elevated UIA leader Stepan Bandera to the level of a Ukrainian national hero.
Svoboda and Right Sektor activists are not just neo-Nazi street protesters. They were key figures in (the) violent uprising that overthrew elected President Viktor Yanukovych and established a coup regime that the U.S. State Department quickly recognized as “legitimate.” Many far-right militants have since been incorporated into the Ukrainian military in its fight to crush resistance to the coup regime from ethnic Russians in the Ukraine’s east.
Several government ministries, including national security, were given to these far-right elements in recognition of their key role in the putsch that forced members of Yanukovych’s government to flee for their lives.
The larger historical context is that Nazism has been deeply rooted in western Ukraine since World War II, especially in cities like Lviv, where a cemetery to the veterans of the Galician SS, a Ukrainian affiliate of the Nazi SS, is maintained.
The muscle behind the U.S.-backed Maidan protests against Yanukovych came from neo-Nazi militias trained in western Ukraine, organized into 100-man brigades and dispatched to Kiev. After the coup, neo-Nazi leader Andriy Parubiy, who was commander of the Maidan “self-defense forces,” was elevated to national security chief and soon announced that the Maidan militia forces would be incorporated into the National Guard and sent to eastern Ukraine to fight ethnic Russians resisting the coup regime.
The conservative London Daily Telegraph offered more details about the Azov battalion in an article by correspondent Tom Parfitt, who wrote:
“Kiev’s use of volunteer paramilitaries to stamp out the Russian-backed Donetsk and Luhansk ‘people’s republics’ should send a shiver down Europe’s spine...Recently formed battalions such as Donbas, Dnipro and Azov, with several thousand men under
their command, are officially under the control of the interior ministry but their financing is murky, their training inadequate and their ideology often alarming. The Azov men use the neo-Nazi Wolfsangel (Wolf’s Hook) symbol on their banner and members of the battalion are openly white supremacists, or anti-Semites.”
Based on interviews with militia members, the Telegraph reported that some of the fighters doubted the reality of the Holocaust, expressed admiration for Adolf Hitler and acknowledged that they are indeed Nazis.
Andriy Biletsky, the Azov commander, “is also head of an extremist Ukrainian group called the Social National Assembly,” according to the Telegraph article which quoted a commentary by Biletsky as declaring:
“The historic mission of our nation in this critical moment is to lead the White Races of the world in a final crusade for their survival. A crusade against the Semite-led Untermenschen.”
But a rebel counteroffensive by ethnic Russians reversed many of Kiev’s gains and drove the Azov and other government forces back to the port city of Mariupol, where Foreign Policy’s reporter Alec Luhn also encountered these neo-Nazis. He wrote:
“Blue and yellow Ukrainian flags fly over Mariupol’s burned-out city administration building and at military checkpoints around the city, but at a sport school near a huge metallurgical plant, another symbol is just as prominent: the wolfsangel (‘wolf trap’) symbol that was widely used in the Third Reich and has been adopted by neo-Nazi groups.
“Pro-Russian forces have said they are fighting against Ukrainian nationalists and ‘fascists’ in the conflict, and in the case of Azov and other battalions, these claims are essentially true.” [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Seeing No Neo-Nazi Militias in Ukraine.”]
(https://consortiumnews.com/2021/12/23/robert-parry-ukraines-neo-nazis-demand- respect/ )
The driver of this violence was largely the Ukrainian far right, which, while a minority of the protesters, served as a kind of revolutionary vanguard. Looking outside Kyiv, a systematic analysis of more than 3,000 Maidan protests found that members of the far- right Svoboda party — whose leader once complained Ukraine was run by a “Muscovite-Jewish mafia” and which includes a politician who admires Joseph Goebbels — were the most active agents in the protests. They were also more likely to take part in violent actions than any group but one: Right Sector, a collection of far- right activists that traces its lineage to genocidal Nazi collaborators.
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/09/stepan-bandera-nationalist-euromaidan-right- sector/
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/13/ukraine-far-right-fascism- mps
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20824693
As the fire worsened (Odessa massacre), those dying inside were serenaded with the taunting singing of the Ukrainian national anthem. The building also was spray-painted with Swastika-like symbols and graffiti reading “Galician SS,” a reference to the Ukrainian nationalist army that fought alongside the German Nazi SS in World War II, killing Russians on the eastern front.
The death by fire of dozens of people in Odessa recalled a World War II incident in 1944 when elements of a Galician SS police regiment took part in the massacre of the Polish village of Huta Pieniacka, which had been a refuge for Jews and was protected by Russian and Polish partisans. Attacked by a mixed force of Ukrainian police and German soldiers on Feb. 28, 1944, hundreds of townspeople were massacred, including many locked in barns that were set ablaze.
The legacy of World War II especially the bitter fight between Ukrainian nationalists from the west and ethnic Russians from the east seven decades ago is never far from the surface in Ukrainian politics. One of the heroes celebrated during the Maidan protests in Kiev was Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, whose name was honored in many banners including one on a podium where Sen. John McCain voiced support for the uprising to oust Yanukovych, whose political base was among ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.
During World War II, Bandera headed the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists-B, a radical paramilitary movement that sought to transform Ukraine into a racially pure state. OUN-B took part in the expulsion and extermination of thousands of Jews and Poles.
Though most of the Maidan protesters in 2013-14 appeared motivated by anger over political corruption and by a desire to join the European Union, neo-Nazis made up a significant number and surged to the front during the seizure of government buildings and the climatic clashes with police.
In the days after the Feb. 22 coup, as the neo-Nazi militias effectively controlled the government, European and U.S. diplomats scrambled to help the shaken parliament put together the semblance of a respectable regime, although at least four ministries, including national security, were awarded to the right-wing extremists in recognition of their crucial role in ousting Yanukovych.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SBo0akeDMY
As extraordinary as it was for a modern European state to hand ministries over to neo- Nazis, virtually the entire U.S. news media cooperated in playing down the neo-Nazi role. Stories in the U.S. media delicately step around this neo-Nazi reality by keeping out relevant context, such as the background of coup regime’s national security chief
Andriy Parubiy, who founded the Social-National Party of Ukraine in 1991, blending radical Ukrainian nationalism with neo-Nazi symbols. Parubiy was commandant of the Maidan’s “self-defense forces.”
Last April, as the Kiev regime launched its “anti-terrorist operation” against the ethnic Russians in the east, Parubiy announced that his right-wing paramilitary forces, incorporated as National Guard units, would lead the way. On April 15, Parubiy went on Twitter to declare, “Reserve unit of National Guard formed #Maidan Self-defense volunteers was sent to the front line this morning.” (Parubiy resigned from his post for unexplained reasons.)
Now, however, as the Ukrainian military tightens its noose around the remaining rebel strongholds, battering them with artillery fire and aerial bombardments, thousands of neo-Nazi militia members are again pressing to the front as fiercely motivated fighters determined to kill as many ethnic Russians as they can. It is a remarkable story but one that the mainstream U.S. news media would prefer not to notice.
https://consortiumnews.com/2014/08/10/nyt-discovers-ukraines-neo-nazis-at-war/
Although it only represents a small section of the Ukraine overall, it represents a much larger section of the Ukrainians who were fighting the Berkut in the street and who overthrew the regime. The physical base of the regime, particularly in the early days, had a considerable ethno-nationalist, far-right element.
The USA/EU had clearly made a calculated decision to turn a blind eye to this element as long as it meant a regime that would finally bring the Ukraine into the Atlanticist bloc.
This was a critical error of judgement that became a major factor in the Crimean and Donbas rebellion."
1990
As the USSR begins to crumble, Ukraine declares itself an independent republic, beginning the process of leaving the union and taking Crimea with it.
Following the fall of the Berlin Wall and the reunification of Germany, multiple Western leaders give both written and spoken assurances to then-Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, that NATO does not plan to increase its territory eastwards.
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion- what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early
To quote US Secretary of State James Baker:
“not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.”
Soros’ group – IRF or International Renaissance Foundation – admits in its 2015 annual report that it has spent more than $180 MILLION in Ukraine since 1990.
http://www.irf.ua/content/files/annual_report_2015_en.pdf
1997
The Charter on a Distinctive Partnership is signed by representatives of both NATO and Ukraine. This document is a long-term agreement that Ukraine will move gradually into cooperation with NATO and eventually become a member. This is in direct violation of the assurances given in 1990.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25457.htm
Joe Biden, in 1997, said that the only thing that could provoke a "vigorous and hostile" Russian response would be if NATO expanded as far as the Baltic states.
Which is exactly what happened. https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-resurfaced-clip-russia-baltic-states-1997- video-1685864
Brzezinski: “Ukraine is a geopolitical pivot. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.”
He also said that Ukraine must be brought into NATO by 2010.
(The Grand Chessboard, Brzezinski, 1997)
2002
NATO publishes their NATO-Ukraine Action Plan, re-affirming their commitment to “closer ties” with Ukraine, and outlining a long term plan for “reforms” in Ukraine that will make it suitable for “full Euro-Atlantic integration”.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_19547.htm
2004-5
The “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine, instigated and financed by western NGOs.
Michael McFaul – U.S. Ambassador to Russia, 2012–2014 :
“Did Americans meddle in the internal affairs of Ukraine?” Then he answered it, “Yes.” Why did McFaul write the article? Because in 2004, Soros and other NGOs fomented the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. Basically, the election was won by a pro-Russia guy. So people protested and demanded a new election. Then, a month later, the pro-U.S. guy won the new election with 52% of the votes. Democracy, America-style.
BTW, that guy – Yanukovych – who lost the election in 2004 ... ran again in 2010 and won fair and square. That’s why we had Euromaidan.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15131-2004Dec20.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_Revolution
Following the “Orange Revolution”, and over-turning of Viktor Yanukovych’s victory in the Presidential election, leaders of Eastern Ukrainian oblasts – including Crimea – raise the issue of increased autonomy and even secession from the country. A conference of politicians from the Donbas region call for a referendum on federalization, but are ignored.
https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-social-sciences/government- society/polsis/staff/wolczuk/Reading-WolczukWhoseUkraine.pdf
2006
A US Navy ship docks at the Crimean port of Feodosiya, leading to mass protests on the peninsula and a peaceful blockade of the port. Then-leader of the opposition Viktor Yanukovych claims that allowing foreign military units onto Crimea’s soil without consulting the regional parliament is a violation of both the Ukrainian and Crimean constitutions. A contemporary Radio Free Europe article notes that 55-60% of all Ukrainians oppose joining NATO.
https://www.rferl.org/a/1068836.html 2008
US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and Ukrainian Foreign Minister Volodymyr Ohryzko sign the US-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership,the charter “emphasizes the continued commitment of the United States to support enhanced engagement between NATO and Ukraine”.
FEBRUARY
Viktor Yanukovych, leader of Ukraine’s Party of Regions, wins the presidential election and is named Ukraine’s fourth President. Yanukovych is the former governor of Donetsk, the region of his birth, and wins office with a huge percentage of the vote from ethnically Russian east Ukraine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Ukrainian_presidential_election
MAY
As one of his first acts as President, Yanukovych signs an agreement with Russia, extending their lease on the Black Sea naval base in Crimea until at least 2042 in exchange for discounted Russian gas.
A PEW poll finds the majority of Ukrainians opposed to joining NATO.
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2010/03/29/ukraine-says-no-to-nato/
JUNE
Ukraine’s parliament votes through a new bill barring the country from joining any military bloc. This, as the BBC noted at the time, effectively ends any prospect of Ukraine joining NATO, killing a plan that the West had worked on for 13 years.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10229626
Following the Russo-Georgian war, and on the back of increased calls for Ukraine to join NATO, the BBC sends a reporter to Crimea. Their article details the strong pro- Russian feeling on the peninsula, the key part Sevastopol has played in Russia’s history, and warnings from Crimeans that “nationalists in Kiev” are trying to “force Russians out”.
A 2008 poll by the Ukrainian Centre for Economic and Political Studies found 64% of Crimeans favored secession from from Ukraine to rejoin Russia, and 55% favored increased autonomy from Kiev.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7622520.stm 2009
Viktor Yanukovych, ousted in the 2014 coup, was taking his second crack at the Ukrainian presidency. He had first been ousted after the 2004 Orange Revolution. Before running again six years later, Yanukovych had worked to rebuild his reputation, becoming the country’s most trusted politician.
https://www.kyivpost.com/article/content/ukraine-politics/poll-yanukovych-most- trusted-politician-in-ukraine-42342.html
By 2010, international monitors had declared the most recent election free and fair, an “impressive display” of democracy, even. But once in power, Yanukovych’s rule was again marred by widespread corruption, authoritarianism.
https://www.oscepa.org/en/news-a-media/press-releases/press-2010/international- observers-say-ukrainian-election-was-free-and-fair
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/feb/08/viktor-yanukovych-ukraine-president- election
That is, whatever flaws or accusations against him, he was democratically elected.
For all the charges then and since that he was a Kremlin puppet, though, there was a hard ceiling to Yanukovych’s eastward turn. His noncommittal stance on joining a Russian-led customs union of former Soviet republics, even when Putin dangled the prospect of even cheaper gas prices, frustrated Moscow. So did his outright rejection
of Putin’s proposal to merge the two nations’ respective state-owned gas giants, effectively handing Moscow control of the Ukrainian pipelines it used to ferry almost all of its gas exports to Europe.
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-russia-relations-depend-on-oligarchic-interests/ 24747089.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-07-08/ukraine-isn-t-planning- naftogaz-gazprom-merger-yanukovych-says
Meanwhile, Yanukovych worked with and publicly encouraged Western involvement in updating Ukraine’s natural gas infrastructure and insisted again and again that “European integration is the key priority of our foreign policy.”
https://web.archive.org/web/20100909081108/http:/www.neurope.eu/articles/Now-or- Never-for-Ukraines-Gas-Transit-Pipelines/102393.php
https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/ukraine-s-yanukovich-pledges-to- work-for-eu-integration/
He kept working toward European Union membership, and to that end pursued a free trade agreement with the EU as well as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) loan the West urged him to take.
That financial lifeline came with a heavy price familiar to the many poor countries that have turned to the West for bailouts: the elimination of tariffs, a wage and pension freeze, spending cuts, and the end of gas subsidies to Ukrainian households. The grim potential of such Western-imposed austerity, on display for all to see in Greece at the time, was presumably worth it to Yanukovych if it kept Moscow’s nose out of his business.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2013/12/21/ russias_austerityfree_loan_leaves_ukraine_in_a_bind_editorial.html
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/06/debt-crisis-global-south-poverty- unemployment-working-class
Putin offered Yanukovych a no-strings-attached loan the same size as the IMF’s, while squeezing him with what amounted to a mini–trade blockade. With the EU failing to offer anything that would match the catastrophic loss of trade with Russia that Ukraine was looking at, Yanukovych made the calculated choice to go with Moscow’s offer. In November, he abruptly reneged on the EU deal, sparking the protests that would topple him from power.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2014/02/21/the-loan-that-launched-a-crisis/
https://web.archive.org/web/20180429152104/http:/aei.pitt.edu/54994/1/ WD_300_Punitive_Trade_Measures_by_Russia.pdf
2011
APRIL
A Kiev Post article entitled “Ukraine Hopes to Get $1.5 Billion from IMF in June” states that the loan is dependent on pension cuts while “maintaining cooperation with the IMF, since it influences the country’s interaction with other international financial institutions and private investors” and further that the “attraction of $850 million from the World Bank in 2011, depended on cooperation with the IMF.”
Bottom line, Putin’s offer was far more attractive and beneficial to Ukrainians. 2012
Yanukovych’s Party of the Regions secures victory in the parliamentary elections, increasing its number of seats and seeing its biggest rival, Arseniy Yatsenyuk‘s Batkivshchyna (Fatherland) party lose 55 seats.
However, the elections also mark the first time Ukraine elected a far-right MP to its parliament, with Oleh Tyahnybok’s Svoboda party winning 37 seats and over 10% of the vote (entirely from the ethnically Ukrainian west of the country).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Ukrainian_parliamentary_election 2013
SEPTEMBER
NED or National Endowment of Democracy is a U.S. taxpayer-funded group that specializes in regime change. It’s chief, Carl Gershman, wrote in a Washington Post op-ed in 2013 (just before the protests) that “Ukraine is the biggest prize.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/former-soviet-states-stand-up-to-russia- will-the-us/2013/09/26/b5ad2be4-246a-11e3-b75d-5b7f66349852_story.html? utm_term=.fce78e8f76a1
NOVEMBER
The Ukrainian government issues a decree suspending preparations for the association agreement (AA). Deputy Prime Minister Yuriy Boyko warns the current terms of the agreement would “seriously damage the economy”.
https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/176144.html
“Pro European” demonstrations begin in Maidan square within days of the decree being issued. A poll run by the Kyiv Post finds an even split on joining the EU vs the Eurasian customs union: 39% for, 37% against.
https://www.kyivpost.com/article/content/ukraine-politics/poll-ukrainian-public-split- over-eu-customs-union-options-332470.html
Yanukovych attends the Eastern Partnership Summit on the 28th, but does not sign the Association Agreement, instead suggesting a new tri-lateral agreement between Ukraine, Russia and the EU. Russia is open to negotiating such a deal, but EU rejects this offer completely.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2013/11/29/ukraine-still-wants-to-sign-eu-deal/
November 21, 2013 – fast forward to the EU summit in Lithuania when President Yanuyovch embarrassed the European Union by rejecting its Agreement in favor of joining Russia’s Common Union with other Commonwealth Independent States.
http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=16674.0
November 29, 2013 – well-orchestrated protestors were already in the streets of Kiev as European Commission President Jose Manual Barroso announced that the EU would “not accept Russia’s veto” of the Agreement.
http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/euromaidan-rallies-in-ukraine-nov-21-23- coverage-332423.html
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25154618
Note: it was the EU who rejected agreement. And who demanded austerity measures of Ukrainians to secure an IMF loan, while Putin’s deal was much sweeter!
DECEMBER
11/12/2013 – US Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt visit the protests and talk to opposition leaders. They are photographed shaking hands and distributing food.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-victoria-nuland-wades-into-ukraine-turmoil-over- yanukovich/
13/12/2013 – US Senator John McCain visits Kiev where he gives a speech telling the crowd “We are here to support your just cause”.
Later he is photographed shaking hands with Oleh Tyahnybok, leader of the far-right Svoboda party.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/15/john-mccain-ukraine-protests- support-just-cause
The Maidan protests didn’t have majority support, with the Ukrainian public split along the regional and sociocultural lines that have long defined so many of the country’s political difficulties. While the western regions — where most of the protesters came from, and which had historically been ruled by other countries, some as late as 1939 — backed the protests, the Russian-speaking East, ruled by Russia since the seventeenth century, were alienated by their explicit anti-Russian nationalism, especially only one year out from the chance to vote Yanukovych out.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/02/12/who-are-the- protesters-in-ukraine/
https://www.kyivpost.com/article/content/ukraine-politics/poll-discovers-euromaidan- evolution-from-dreamy-to-radical-336389.html
December 13, 2013 – As if intent on providing incontrovertible evidence of US involvement in Ukraine, Assistant US Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia Victoria Nuland proudly told a meeting of the International Business Conference sponsored by the US-Ukrainian Foundation that the US had ‘invested’ more than $5 billion and ‘five years worth of work and preparation” in achieving what she called Ukraine’s ‘European aspirations.”
http://www.sott.net/article/273602-US-Assistant-Secretary-of-State-Victoria-Nuland- says-Washington-has-spent-5-billion-trying-to-subvert-Ukraine
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/27/geop-f27.html
While Western media have portrayed Yanukovych as a ‘weak’ leader, Nuland’s description of a ‘tough’ meeting can only mean that he resisted her threats and intimidations.
At about the same time Nuland was wooing fascist extremists, Sen. John McCain (R- Az) and Sen. Chris Murphy (D- Conn) shared the stage in Kiev with Tyahnybok offering their support and opposition to the sitting government.
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/02/23/democracy-murdered-protest-ukraine- falls-intrigue-violence/
http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mccain-meets-oleh-tyahnybok-in- ukraine-2013-12
The Svoboda party which has roots with extreme vigilante and anti-semitic groups has since received at least three high level cabinet posts in the interim government including deputy prime minister.
http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mccain-meets-oleh-tyahnybok-in- ukraine-2013-12
With Ukraine on the verge of running out of money to service its debt in the coming months, Putin has just come through with a $20 billion-plus lifeline that Europe and the International Monetary Fund could have provided, but didn’t. It takes the form of a Russian loan worth $15 billion and a big break on gas prices.
For the sin of declining a Western aid package loaded with austerity measures, and accepting instead an unencumbered Russian package, Yanukovych became a target for U.S. regime change.
https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2013/12/17/ russia_and_ukraine_sign_multibilliondollar_bond_gas_deal.html
2014
15/1/2014 – At a meeting of the US Senate’s Foreign Affairs Committee, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Melia admits that the US State Department has spent 5 billion dollars “assisting Ukraine”.
This includes 180 million dollars on “development programs” for “judges, members of parliament [and] political parties”.
https://www.foreign.senate.gov/hearings/business-meeting-and-implications-of-the- crisis-in-ukraine-hearing
The driver of this violence was largely the Ukrainian far right, which, while a minority of the protesters, served as a kind of revolutionary vanguard. Looking outside Kyiv, a systematic analysis of more than 3,000 Maidan protests found that members of the far- right Svoboda party — whose leader once complained Ukraine was run by a “Muscovite-Jewish mafia” and which includes a politician who admires Joseph Goebbels — were the most active agents in the protests. They were also more likely to take part in violent actions than any group but one: Right Sector, a collection of far- right activists that traces its lineage to genocidal Nazi collaborators.
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20824693
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/13/ukraine-far-right-fascism- mps
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/09/stepan-bandera-nationalist-euromaidan-right- sector/
January 19 - Right Sector led the January 19 attacks on police in Kyiv that even opposition leaders criticized, with one protester saying the far-right bloc had “breathed new life into these protests.” Andriy Parubiy, the unofficial “commander of Maidan,” founded the Social-National Party of Ukraine — a barely even winking allusion to Nazism — that later became Svoboda. By January 2014, even NBC was admitting that “right-wing militia-type toughs are now one of the strongest factions leading Ukraine’s protests.” What was meant to be a revolution for democracy and liberal values ended up featuring ultranationalist chants from the 1930s and prominent displays of fascist and white supremacist symbols, including the American Confederate flag.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/02/27/ukraine-opposition-parubiy/ 5844437/
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/are-militants-hijacking-ukraines-liberal-protest- n18786
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26468720
25/1/2014 – President Yanukovych reaches out to opposition leaders, offering them a power-sharing agreement that would install Yatseniyuk as Prime Minister and Vitaliy Klitschko as his deputy. The opposition refuses the offer.
https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-opposition-shuns-yanukovych-power-share-offer/ a-17387381
28/1/2014 – In a gesture of compromise, the parliament repeals 9 of the ten protest laws, passing a new law granting amnesty to all those involved in the protests, providing they cease occupying government buildings. The oppostion refuses these terms.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25955644
January 30, 2014 – The State Department’s website Media Note announced Nuland’s upcoming travel plans that ”In Kyiv, Assistant Secretary Nuland will meet with government officials, opposition leaders, civil society and business leaders to encourage agreement on a new government and plan of action.” In other words, almost a month before President Yanukovych was ousted, the US was planning to rid the world of another independently elected President.
https://2009-2017.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/01/221059.htm
FEBRUARY
7/2/2014 – A recorded phone call between Nuland and Pyatt is leaked to the press, famously dubbed the “fuck the EU” call.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26079957
In the conversation, dated January 28th, Nuland and Pyatt discuss at length the structure of the Ukrainian cabinet once Yanukovych is gone. This is still 25 days before Yanukovych was removed from power
A poll published that same day by the Kyiv Post found more Ukrainians opposed the Maidan protests than supported them.
https://www.kyivpost.com/article/content/ukraine-politics/more-ukrainians-disapprove- of-euromaidan-protests-than-approve-of-it-poll-336461.html
16/2/2014 – In yet another attempt at compromise, the government releases all prisoners arrested during the protests, this time the opposition responds, lifting their 3- month long occupation of Kiev City Hall.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/16/kiev-protesters-leave-city-hall
19/2/2014 – President Yanukovych declares a “truce” in a joint statement signed by the three main opposition leaders. The statement committed to negotiation for a lasting peace.
https://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/19/world/europe/ukraine-protests/index.html
February 20, 2014 – Foreign ministers from Poland, Germany and France visiting Kiev secured President Yanukovych’s agreement that would commit the government to an interim administration, constitutional reform and new parliamentary and presidential elections.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/20/ukraine-eu-foreign-ministers-agree- sanctions-officials
With “no clear sign that EU or US pressure has achieved” the desired effect, opposition leaders rejected Yanukovych’s compromise which would have ended the three month stand-off.
https://www.ft.com/content/7be2df76-8617-11e3- b30d-00144feab7de#axzz2uqSgRPgy
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called on the German, French and Polish foreign ministers to step in and take responsibility for upholding the deal they helped forge and not let “armed extremists” directly threaten Ukrainian sovereignty.
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/ukraine-protesters-take-kiev-president-says- coup-551647
20/2/2014 – Snipers open fire on the crowd in Maidan Square, resulting in at least sixty deaths.
Does this make sense? A truce is called and a beleaguered government is under the cosh but their very first act is to slaughter protesters? This was an act of sanctioned mercenaries to keep the confrontation going and destroy any possible truce. As we’ll see...
Rooftop killings
20/2/2014 – Snipers open fire on the crowd in Maidan Square, resulting in at least sixty deaths. Both protesters and police officers are killed in the gunfire. EuroNews reports that the “truce is shattered” mere hours after it was signed.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140220185431/http://www.euronews.com/2014/02/20/ ukraine-death-toll-rises-as-protesters-retake-maida/
In a secretly recorded phone call in 2014, Estonia’s foreign minister revealed three shocking facts about the Maidan murders:
* Same sniper bullets killed both the police and the protesters
* The investigators strongly believed that the new coalition was behind the snipers (by “new coalition,” he means the new government installed by the U.S.).
* The new government refused to look into the matter.
*
Here’s the link to an excerpt from the phone call:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJywviAnVWE
A couple of years later, in an Italian documentary called “The Hidden Truth About Ukraine,” some men from the Republic of Georgia came forward and admitted that they were used as snipers in Kiev.
Age verification needed on YouTube: https://thesaker.is/the-hidden-truth-about-ukraine-a-documentary/
The evidence that the snipers were shooting at both sides in an effort to stoke chaos is presented to the EU’s Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton by Estonia Foreign Minister Urmas Paet in a phone call that is later leaked to the press, and confirmed to be genuine by the Estonian government.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/05/ukraine-bugged-call-catherine- ashton-urmas-paet
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2573923/Estonian-Foreign-Ministry-confirms- authenticity-leaked-phone-call-discussing-Kiev-snipers-shot-protesters-possibly- hired-Ukraines-new-leaders.html
Neither the EU, nor the new government of Ukraine, makes any effort to investigate this evidence or bring the killers to justice.
At the time, men resembling protesters had been witnessed shooting from protester- controlled buildings in the capital, and multiple Maidan medics had said the bullet wounds in police and protesters looked to have come from the same weapon.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150215073346/http:/www.bbc.com/news/world- europe-26284100
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/05/ukraine-bugged-call-catherine- ashton-urmas-paet
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/2014/0308/Kiev-snipers-Who-was- behind-them
A Maidan protester later admitted to killing two officers and wounding others on the day, and crates of empty Kalashnikov bullets were found in the protester-occupied Ukraina Hotel, the same place a decorated military pilot and anti-Russian resistance hero later said she had seen an opposition MP leading snipers to.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/26/he-killed-for-the-maidan/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/20/ukraine-snipers-kiev-hotel-makeshift- morgue
https://apnews.com/article/fb5fc2541be942a68f8031033e7ca3ff
The government’s investigation, meanwhile, which focused only on the protester murders, started out filled with serious flaws and irregularities.
The University of Ottowa’s Ivan Katchanovski has analyzed evidence that’s come out in the course of the investigation and trial into the murders. According to Katchanovski, a majority of wounded protesters testified they either saw snipers in protester-controlled buildings or were shot by bullets coming from their direction, testimony backed by forensic examinations.
https://jordanrussiacenter.org/news/the-maidan-massacre-in-ukraine-revelations-from- trials-and-investigation/#.Yfr2c-rMI2x
Closure on the matter is unlikely, though, since the post-Yanukovych interim government, in which leading far-right figures took prominent positions, swiftly passed a law giving Maidan participants immunity for any violence.
https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/MaidanSixYearsLater.aspx
For a brief period, it looked like the spiraling crisis might actually be resolved peacefully, when Yanukovych and opposition parties signed a Europe-brokered deal the next day on February 21, agreeing to scale back the president’s powers and hold new elections that December. But the deal was met with outrage from the increasingly militant street movement.
That is, all of the demands of the original protesters were met. The US backed nazis officially took the reins.
21/2/2014 – Despite the bloodshed, negotiations continue, resulting in the “Agreement on settlement of political crisis in Ukraine”, signed by all parties plus the foreign minsiters of Germany and Poland.
The agreement required the creation of a temporary “National Unity Government”, to be replaced following new Presidential Elections by the end of 2014. It also called for a full investigation into the shootings on the Maidan the previous day.
Yanukovych pledged that the government would not declare a state of emergency or call in the military, and would pull all police back from the site of the protests, in return for protesters surrendering all public buildings and illegal weapons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreement_on_settlement_of_political_crisis_in_Ukraine
Leaders of the militant protesters – including Dmitryo Yarosh of the neo-Nazi Right Sector – rejected the agreement, and threatened to storm the Parliament and Presidental Residence if Yanukoyvch did not resign immediately.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmytro_Yarosh
February 21, 2014 – At a special summit in Brussels, European foreign ministers agreed to adopt sanctions on Ukraine including visa bans and asset freezes. The EU decision followed “immense pressure from the US for the European powers to take punitive action against the Ukrainian regime.” Washington had already imposed travel bans on 20 leading Ukrainians.
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/21/ukra-f21.html
22/2/2014 – Rather than abiding by the terms of the agreement, once the police pulled back the protesters stormed government buildings and seized control of Kiev. Yanukovych flees to the city of Kharkiv in eastern Ukraine.
February 22, 2014 – An hour after refusing to resign, the Ukrainian Parliament voted, according to Russian president Vladimir Putin, in an unconstitutional action to oust President Yanukovych and that pro-EU forces staged a ‘coup’. Yanukovych departed Kiev in fear for his life.
http://www.businessinsider.com/yanukovych-leaves-kiev-2014-2 http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2014/02/25/police-state-ukraine
23/2 – One of the first bills passed by the new government repeals the law making Russian an official state language. Neo-Naziprit leaders Oleh Tyanobohk and Dimitri Yarosh propose going further and banning both the Party of the Regions and the Ukrainian Communist Party, both traditionally political parties representing Eastern Ukraine, including Crimea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Language_policy_in_Ukraine#:~:text=Since%20then%20various%20cities%20and,vot ed%20to%20repeal%20the%20law.
27/2/2014 – Arseniy Yatsenyuk is sworn in as Ukraine’s interim Prime Minister, a post he would hold onto following elections in May 2014.
Vitaly Klitschko is relegated to the somewhat lower office of Mayor of Kiev, and Oleh Tyahnybok resumed his office as a simple MP.
***Ukraine’s new government takes shape exactly as predicted by Nuland in her phone call of January 28th.***
The same day Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Secretary General of NATO, tells the press that “the door is still open” for Ukraine to join the military bloc.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140228013753/http://www.euronews.com/2014/02/26/ door-to-nato-remains-open-for-ukraine/
Got that? There were several occasions that a peaceful solution was on the table with all of the protesters’ demands being met. US backed nazis and mercenaries scuppered peaceful resolution. Including the use of mass murder through snipers killing protesters from rooftops. And creating civil war conditions. They don’t CARE.
The next post will show the horror of that civil war. The nest of vipers they unleashed. The corrupt who took power. And that NOTHING actually changed bar the annihilation of a society and their economy being obliterated.
Donbass
The Donbass region of eastern Ukraine, populated by a large number of ethnic Russians, did not recognize the coup government, whose first act was to outlaw the public use of the Russian language (which it later reversed). The Donbass immediately sought autonomy from Kiev. It saw the U.S.-installed regime as illegitimate and hostile to its interests and culture. In essence, it was defending a democratic election.
Accountability for killings in Ukraine *from January 2014 to May 2016*:
OHCHR estimates that between mid-April 2014 and 31 May 2016, at least 9,404 people, of which up to 2,000 are civilians, have been killed as a result of the conflict. The vast majority of civilian casualties, recorded on the territories controlled by the Government of Ukraine and on those controlled by armed groups, were caused by the indiscriminate shelling of residential areas,
About 85 to 90 per cent of these deaths, recorded by OHCHR both in the territories controlled by the Government and in the areas controlled by armed groups, are as a result of shelling of populated areas with mortars, canons, howitzers, tanks and multiple launch rocket systems.
By early June 2016, the number of non-combat fatalities among Ukrainian servicemen had reached 1,294, according to the Chief Military Prosecutor, including 259 suicides and 121 case of “intentional homicide”. OHCHR is concerned that some deaths – such as those of servicemen who were whistle-blowers regarding misdeeds of Ukrainian forces in the conflict zone (corruption and looting) – have been investigated ineffectively.
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/ OHCHRThematicReportUkraineJan2014-May2016_EN.pdf
Update on fatalities Feb 2019
KYIV -- Some 13,000 people have been killed, a quarter of them civilians, and as many as 30,000 wounded in the war in eastern Ukraine since it broke out in April 2014, the United Nations says.
The estimated toll includes more than 3,300 civilian deaths, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) said in a document dated February 25 and provided to RFE/RL the same day.
The estimated death toll also includes 4,000 members of Ukrainian forces and 5,500 "armed groups," the OHCHR document said.
When the civil war began in eastern Ukraine against Russian-backed separatists, the new western-backed government began to arm Azov. The militia soon fell under the jurisdiction of the Ukrainian interior ministry, and saw some of the most intense frontline combat against the separatists.
The group stands accused in United Nations and Human Rights Watch reports of committing war crimes against pro-Russian separatists during the ongoing civil war in the eastern Donbass region, including torture, sexual violence and targeting of civilian homes.
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/ Ukraine_13th_HRMMU_Report_3March2016.pdf
https://www.hrw.org/report/2016/07/21/you-dont-exist/arbitrary-detentions-enforced- disappearances-and-torture-eastern
https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/ReportCRSV_EN.pdf
Today, Azov is run by Arsen Avakov, Ukraine’s interior minister. According to the BBC, he pays its fighters, and has appointed one of its military commanders, Vadym Troyan, as his deputy – with control over the police.
Avakov last year met with the Israeli interior minister Aryeh Deri to discuss “fruitful cooperation.”
https://avakov.com/arsen-avakov-politsiya-ukrainyi-i-izrailya-sovmestno-budut- obespechivat-poryadok-vo-vremya-palomnichestva-hasidov-v-uman.html
Azov’s young founder and first military commander Andriy Biletsky is today a lawmaker in the Ukrainian parliament.
As journalist Max Blumenthal explained on The Real News in February, Biletsky has “pledged to restore the honor of the white race” and has advanced laws forbidding “race mixing.”
https://therealnews.com/stories/max-blumenthal-us-is-arming-neo-nazis-in-ukraine
According to The Telegraph, Biletsky in 2014 wrote that “the historic mission of our nation in this critical moment is to lead the white races of the world in a final crusade for their survival. A crusade against the Semite-led untermenschen.”
https://electronicintifada.net/content/israel-arming-neo-nazis-ukraine/24876
On the 21st of March the interim government of Ukraine officialy signs the controversial European Union Association Agreement into law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union–Ukraine_Association_Agreement
The U.S. had also claimed that Russia “invaded” Crimea in March 2014, when Russia already had troops stationed there under an agreement with Ukraine. “You just don’t in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pre-text,” said U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who voted in the Senate for what a real invasion looks like: the 2003 U.S. unprovoked attack on Iraq — on a completely trumped-up pretext.
https://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-now/2014/03/kerry-russia-behaving-like-its- the-19th-century-184280
Fucking. Wow.
By the way, an excellent breakdown of the situation in Crimea can be found here: https://alethonews.com/2022/03/08/timeline-the-crimean-referendum/
Meanwhile, President Joe Biden’s vow to send more U.S. troops to NATO’s eastern allies; NATO exercises near Russia’s borders and the supply of $450 million in weaponry to Ukraine are presented as the proper order of things: neither threatening, aggressive nor escalatory.
Two key demands by Russian President Vladimir Putin, namely, that Ukraine never host U.S. missiles or join NATO, were dismissed by Nuland saying, “Those are decisions for Ukraine to make and for NATO to make, not for the Kremlin to make.”
(How Not to Explain the Ukraine Crisis, Mike Madden, Consortium News, December 24, 2021)
In Odesa, 48 people were deprived of their lives in the violence of 2 May 2014 when they were trapped in government buildings and burned alive by mainly far right groups.
In April 2014, the Kiev regime launched “anti-terrorist” military operations against the breakaway provinces. Worse yet, it turned a blind eye to the real terrorists, neo-Nazi paramilitary squads like the Azov Battalion, that moved into the region. A bloody civil war was now underway, instigated by Kiev’s willingness to kill its own people in the Donbass. To date, the war has claimed 14,000 lives.
NATO and U.S. officials said regular units of the Russian military crossed a few kilometers into Ukrainian territory on August 2014, which Russia denied, when the separatist forces had been pushed eastward toward the Russian border and hundreds of civilians had been killed.
As happened in Georgia in 2008, a government militarily attacked its own people and Russia intervened to drive the military forces back and protect the local population. In that 2008 case, a European Union investigation determined that Georgia, not Russia, was the aggressor.
https://www.france24.com/en/20090930-georgia-war-russia-eu-south-ossetia- tskhinvali-putin-military
On 25 May 2014, Poroshenko was elected president of Ukraine in snap election
The same far right that had led the charge in toppling Yanukovych, including Parubiy, found themselves with plum roles in the interim government that followed.
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/analysis-u-s-cozies-kiev- government-including-far-right-n66061
The winner of the 2014 snap presidential election — Ukraine’s seventh-richest man, Petro Poroshenko — had a history of corruption.
https://web.archive.org/web/20131103105813/http:/en.for-ua.com/analytics/ 2005/10/28/164030.html
His interior minister soon incorporated the Azov Regiment, a neo-Nazi militia, into Ukraine’s National Guard.
https://euromaidanpress.com/2014/10/09/azov-regiment-to-join-ukraines-national- guard/
The country was now a Mecca for far-right extremists around the world, who come to learn and get training from Azov — including, ironically, Russian white supremacists who were hounded from their country by Putin.
https://ctc.usma.edu/the-nexus-between-far-right-extremists-in-the-united-states-and- ukraine/
https://www.politico.eu/article/pro-trump-insurrection-vladimir-putin-worst-nightmare/
Despite far-right parties ultimately losing seats in Parliament, ultranationalist movements successfully shifted the country’s politics to the extreme right.
https://fpc.org.uk/the-unique-extra-parliamentary-power-of-ukrainian-radical- nationalists-is-a-threat-to-the-political-regime-and-minorities/
Poroshenko and other centrists backed measures to marginalize the speaking of Russian and glorify Nazi collaborators.
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/
Even so, far-right candidates have entered Parliament on non-far-right tickets, and extremists like former Azov commander Andriy Biletsky have taken high-ranking law enforcement positions.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/13/ukraine-far-right-fascism- mps
Far-right vigilantism spread through the country, Poroshenko himself granted citizenship to a Belarusian neo-Nazi and engaged in some borderline anti-Semitism of his own.
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2014/5/20/ukraines-far-right-popular-or- propaganda
https://khpg.org/en/1417957695
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/ukraine-s-presidential-battle-heats-up- after-comedian-s-first-round-win-1.3845984
September 2014 Minsk agreement
Between September 2014 and February 2015, Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany signed several iterations of the so-called Minsk agreements, which eventually stopped the forward movement of troops and reduced fighting significantly. But the agreements were never implemented, and the fighting has transformed into a trench war, with roughly 75,000 troops facing off along a 420-km-long front line cutting through densely populated areas. The war has ruined the area's economy and heavy industries, forced millions to relocate and turned the conflict zone into one of the world’s most mine- contaminated areas.
https://www.crisisgroup.org/content/conflict-ukraines-donbas-visual-explainer OCTOBER 2014
Following the 2014 parliamentary elections, the 5-party coalition government officially makes joining NATO a “national priority”.
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-parliament-coalition-agreement/26703123.html https://off-guardian.org/2022/02/24/timeline-euromaidan-the-original-ukraine-crisis/ 2016
The Ukrainian government’s links to Neo-Nazis are never openly admitted in the U.S., but this is the reason why Congress refused to pass a bill that banned funding of Neo- Nazi groups.
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/congress-has-removed-a-ban-on-funding- neo-nazis-from-its-year-end-spending-bill/
2017
frustrated Ukrainians who had helped drive Yanukovych out, was neither peace and stability, nor a move toward liberal values and democracy. In fact, almost all of the protesters’ demands have gone unfulfilled.
- law enforcement and special services reform
- judicial reform
- anticorruption legislation
- Anti-elitism in politics
- Investigation of the events at Euromaidan
https://euromaidanpress.com/2018/02/21/the-top-5-unfulfilled-demands-of-ukraines- euromaidan-revolution/
2018
A March 2018 report by Reuters stated that “(neo nazi youth organization) C14 and Kiev’s city government recently signed an agreement allowing C14 to establish a ‘municipal guard’ to patrol the streets,” effectively giving them the sanction of the state to carry out pogroms.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cohen-ukraine-commentary/commentary-ukraines- neo-nazi-problem-idUSKBN1GV2TY
As The Grayzone reported, C14 led raid to “purge” Romani from Kiev’s railway station in collaboration with the Kiev police.
https://thegrayzone.com/2018/10/30/c14-ukrainian-nazi-kiev-police-america-house/
Not only was this activity sanctioned by the Kiev city government, the US government itself saw little problem with it, hosting Bondar at an official US government institution in Kiev where he bragged about the pogroms. C14 continued to receive state funding throughout 2018 for “national-patriotic education.”
https://thegrayzone.com/2018/10/30/c14-ukrainian-nazi-kiev-police-america-house/
https://web.archive.org/web/20180617020140/https://hromadskeradio.org/derzhava- finansuye-c14
Karas has claimed that the Ukrainian Security Serves would “pass on” information regarding pro-separatist rallies “not only [to] us, but also Azov, the Right Sector and so on.”
“In general, deputies of all factions, the National Guard, the Security Service of Ukraine and the Ministry of Internal Affairs work for us. You can joke like that,” Karas said.
https://web.archive.org/web/20220129134515/https://news.liga.net/politics/interview/ s14_kto_oni_i_pochemu_im_pozvoleno_bit_lyudey
https://thegrayzone.com/2022/03/04/nazis-ukrainian-war-russia/? fbclid=IwAR1YQMgAuSze1Js_v3W0CSNpkEphHL6gPAVskwF6HVVj6QtLJO-lXrR3xI4
2019
Little to nothing has changed about Ukrainian corruption or authoritarianism, under either Poroshenko or current president Volodymyr Zelensky, elected in 2019 as an outsider change agent.
Each has governed like an autocrat, using their powers to go after political opponents and weaken dissent.
https://www.kyivpost.com/article/opinion/editorial/budding-autocrat.html
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-zelensky’s-ukraine-becoming-increasingly- autocratic-182124
And have been embroiled in personal enrichment scandals that remain endemic to the Ukrainian political class.
https://eurasianet.org/a-brief-history-of-corruption-in-ukraine-the-poroshenko-era
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/5/pandora-papers-no-re-election-for- ukraines-comedian-president
With Yanukovych out, the interim government and Washington’s handpicked prime minister signed the EU deal whose rejection had started it all, solidifying Ukraine’s move to the West, and ushering in the brutal austerity measures demanded by the IMF.
Over the years, Yanukovych’s successor signed off on a round of privatization, raised the pension age, and slashed gas subsidies, urged on by then vice president Joe Biden.
https://www.kyivpost.com/business/poroshenko-signs-law-privatization-says-russian- money-will-not-involved.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-election-economy-insight/no-gas-no- votes-subsidy-cuts-imperil-ukraine-leaders-reelection-bid-idUSKCN1QH0TF
Unsurprisingly, angry Ukrainians both voted with their feet and threw him out in a landslide.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-election-poroshenko-newsmaker/ukraines- action-man-president-faces-voters-judgment-idUSKCN1R80LB
https://www.unian.info/society/2188574-reasons-why-ukrainian-population- shrinks.html
Zelensky
Zelensky’s name was on a recent list by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists’ Pandora Papers.
https://www.icij.org/investigations/pandora-papers/global-investigation-tax-havens- offshore/
According to the ICIJ’s findings published in The Guardian, Zelensky owned a stake in a British Virgin Islands firm described as holding shares in film-production and distribution companies. A month before he was elected president, Zelensky transferred his shares to Serhiy Shefir, a friend and business partner, ICIJ reported.
https://www.icij.org/investigations/pandora-papers/about-pandora-papers-leak- dataset/
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/oct/03/revealed-anti-oligarch-ukrainian- president-offshore-connections-volodymyr-zelenskiy? fbclid=IwAR31YN1Vyahkf3PDph1QPx7of1XEZUil2gp0lkvFh4B5v6TD1WvQtNWUib8
Someone tried to murder him.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/22/world/europe/ukraine-assassination- attempt.html
Shefir is believed to have created a network of offshore entities for Zelensky and others, such as Zelensky former business partner and employer, and a U.S. sanctioned Ukrainian banking and media tycoon named Ihor Kolomoisky. U.S. authorities allege that Kolomoisky “laundered $5.5 billion through a tangle of shell companies, purchasing factories and commercial properties across the U.S. heartland,” according to the ICIJ.
https://www.businessinsider.in/finance/news/pandora-papers-expose-secret- documents-of-365-leaders-and-officials-including-tony-blair-king-of-jordan-czech-pm/ articleshow/86745621.cms
A recent report published September 23 by the European Court of Auditors on corruption in Ukraine said that between 2016 and 2020, the three main obstacles to economic growth were the same as they were pre-Maidan movement, when people were protesting in favor of a push towards EU integration. The perception was that corruption, no trust in the courts, and market monopolies (state capture by a few private business owners) were major obstacles to modernizing Ukraine.
https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=59383
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2021/10/14/ukraine-2021-the-crisis- continues/?sh=2d456e974a8a
Zelensky once publically “confronted” the extremist elements in the military. He became the target of an angry backlash.
https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/im-not-a-loser-zelensky-clashes-with- veterans-over-donbas-disengagement.html? __cf_chl_tk=SbolmTBS6QnjMnPJLiQEsivGNnuW6T4od28tzMOrEM0-1646110945-0- gaNycGzNCJE
Andriy Biletsky, the proudly fascist Azov Battalion leader who once pledged to “lead the white races of the world in a final crusade...against Semite-led Untermenschen”, vowed to bring thousands of fighters to Zolote if Zelensky pressed any further.
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/
Meanwhile, a parliamentarian from the party of former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko openly fantasized about Zelensky being blown to bits by a militant’s grenade.
Though Zelensky achieved a minor disengagement, the neo-Nazi paramilitaries escalated their “No Capitulation” campaign. And within months, fighting began to heat up again in Zolote, sparking a new cycle of violations of the Minsk Agreement.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51543463
https://www.unian.info/politics/1043394-minsk-agreement-full-text-in-english.html
By this point, Azov had been formally incorporated into the Ukrainian military and its street vigilante wing, known as the National Corps, was deployed across the country under the watch of the Ukrainian Interior Ministry, and alongside the National Police.
https://khpg.org/en/1517275970
In December 2021, Zelensky would be seen delivering a “Hero of Ukraine” award to a leader of the fascistic Right Sector in a ceremony in Ukraine’s parliament.
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/03/04/how-zelensky-made-peace-with-neo-nazis/
Behind the corporate media spin lies the complex and increasingly close relationship Zelensky’s administration has enjoyed with the neo-Nazi forces invested with key military and political posts by the Ukrainian state, and the power these open fascists have enjoyed since Washington installed a Western-aligned regime through a coup in 2014.
In fact, Zelensky’s top financial backer, the Ukrainian Jewish oligarch Igor Kolomoisky, has been a key benefactor of the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion and other extremists militias.
Incorporated into the Ukrainian National Guard, the Azov Battalion is considered the most ideologically zealous and militarily motivated unit fighting pro-Russian separatists in the eastern Donbass region.
With Nazi-inspired Wolfsangel insignia on the uniforms of its fighters, who have been photographed with Nazi SS symbols on their helmets, Azov “is known for its association with neo-Nazi ideology...[and] is believed to have participated in training and radicalizing US-based white supremacy organizations,” according to an FBI indictment of several US white nationalists that traveled to Kiev to train with Azov.
https://www.rferl.org/a/azov-ukraine-s-most-prominent-ultranationalist-group-sets-its- sights-on-u-s-europe/29600564.html
Igor Kolomoisky, a Ukrainian energy baron of Jewish heritage, has been a top funder of Azov since it was formed in 2014.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/1/who-are-the-azov-regiment
He has also bankrolled private militias like the Dnipro and Aidar Battalions, and has deployed them as a personal thug squad to protect his financial interests.
https://www.businessinsider.com/the-pocket-army-controlled-by-sacked-ukrainian- billionaire-igor-kolomoisky-2015-3
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-kolomoisky/ukrainian-oligarch-under- fire-after-night-raid-on-state-oil-firm-idUSKBN0MG2A320150320
In 2019, Kolomoisky emerged as the top backer of Zelensky’s presidential bid. Though Zelensky made anti-corruption the signature issue of his campaign, the Pandora Papers exposed him and members of his inner circle stashing large payments from Kolomoisky in a shadowy web of offshore accounts.
https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/reactions-in-ukraine-to-pandora-papers- revelations.html
When Zelensky took office in May 2019, the Azov Battalion maintained de facto control of the strategic southeastern port city of Mariupol and its surrounding villages. As Open Democracy noted, “Azov has certainly established political control of the streets in Mariupol. To maintain this control, they have to react violently, even if not officially, to any public event which diverges sufficiently from their political agenda.”
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/entrepreneurs-of-political-violence-ukraine- far-right/
Attacks by Azov in Mariupol have included assaults on “feminists and liberals” marching on International Women’s Day among other incidents.
In March 2019, members of the Azov Battalion’s National Corps attacked the home of Viktor Medvedchuk, the leading opposition figure in Ukraine, accusing him of treason for his friendly relations with Vladimir Putin, the godfather of Medvedchuk’s daughter.
https://tonygreenstein.com/2022/03/why-has-the-bbc-and-the-media-whitewashed- the-role-of-neo-nazi-militias-in-ukraine/
Zelensky’s administration escalated the attack on Medvedchuk, shuttering several media outlets he controlled in February 2021 with the open approval of the US State Department, and jailing the opposition leader for treason three months later. Zelensky justified his actions on the grounds that he needed to “fight against the danger of Russian aggression in the information arena.”
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-medvedchuk-tv-channels-zelenskiy-defends-ban/ 31085877.html
https://apnews.com/article/europe-ukraine-business-government-and-politics- c3cb6ca3a2a58096fcd9810436539de9
Next, in August 2020, Azov’s National Corps opened fire on a bus containing members of Medvedchuk’s party, Patriots for Life, wounding several with rubber-coated steel bullets.
https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/unknown-attackers-shoot-rubber-bullets-at- bus-near-kharkiv-injure-4.html
Throughout 2019, Zelensky and his administration deepened their ties with ultra- nationalist elements across Ukraine.
Just days after Zelensky’s meeting with Karas and other neo-Nazi leaders in November 2019, Oleksiy Honcharuk – then the Prime Minister and deputy head of Zelensky’s presidential office – appeared on stage at a neo-Nazi concert organized by C14 figure and accused murderer Andriy Medvedko.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/ukrainian-pm-minister-attended-neo-nazi-concert-in- kyiv/
In November 2021, one of Ukraine’s most prominent ultra-nationalist militiamen, Dmytro Yarosh, announced that he had been appointed as an advisor to the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Yarosh is an avowed follower of the Nazi collaborator Bandera who led Right Sector from 2013 to 2015, vowing to lead the “de-Russification” of Ukraine.
https://www.facebook.com/dyastrub/posts/4533858036691045
https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/ukrainian-militias-prepare-for-possibility- of-russian-invasion-a-964628.html
A month later, as war with Russia drew closer, Zelensky awarded Right Sector commander Dmytro Kotsyubaylo the “Hero of Ukraine” commendation. Known as “Da Vinci,” Kosyubaylo keeps a pet wolf in his frontline base, and likes to joke to visiting reporters that his fighters “feed it the bones of Russian-speaking children.”
https://focus.ua/uk/politics/499544-za-lichnoe-muzhestvo-zelenskiy-prisvoil-zvanie- geroya-ukrainy-dobrovolcu-pravo-sektora
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/20/world/europe/-ukraine-russia-putin- invasion.html
When Russian forces entered Ukraine this February 24, encircling the Ukrainian military in the east and driving towards Kiev, President Zelensky announced a national mobilization that included the release of criminals from prison, among them accused murderers wanted in Russia. He also blessed the distribution of arms to average citizens, and their training by battle-hardened paramilitaries like the Azov Battalion.
https://twitter.com/RussiaUSA/status/1498245126300311552
On March 1, Zelensky replaced the regional administrator of Odessa with Maksym Marchenko, a former commander of the extreme right Aidar Battalion, which has been accused of an array of war crimes in the Donbass region.
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3417806-zelensky-replaces-heads-of-odesa- cherkasy-regional-state-administrations.html
https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur50/040/2014/en/
https://thegrayzone.com/2022/03/04/nazis-ukrainian-war-russia/? fbclid=IwAR1YQMgAuSze1Js_v3W0CSNpkEphHL6gPAVskwF6HVVj6QtLJO-lXrR3xI4
Crimea: a clear example of when “self determination” means nothing to the west when it doesn’t suit them —————————————————————————————————————— *Note: this entire piece is copied from the link in the comments. I’ve added a couple of
links 👍
1954
Soviet leader Nikita Kruschev signs a decree transferring Crimea from the Russian SSR to the Ukrainian SSR. His motivation for doing so is a matter of historical debate, as is the constitutionality of the decision. However, as they were all one nation at that time, the administrative decision is more of a “symbolic gesture” than anything else.
Prior to this, Crimea had been a part of Russia since 1783 when the Russian Empire took control of the Crimean Khanate following the decline in power of the Ottoman Empire.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ 1954_transfer_of_Crimea#:~:text=After%20the%20death%20of%20Joseph,SFSR%20 to%20the%20Ukrainian%20SSR.
https://choice.npr.org/index.html?origin=https://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/ 2014/02/27/283481587/crimea-a-gift-to-ukraine-becomes-a-political-flash-point
1965
Sevastopol, Crimea’s major port city, is officially named a “Hero City” of the USSR, an honour given to 12 cities across the country to mark the 20th Victory Day. Sevastopol held against major assaults from the Axis powers in October and December of 1941, before holding out for a six month siege and finally falling to the Nazis in June of 1942.
1990
As the USSR begins to crumble, Ukraine declares itself an independent republic, beginning the process of leaving the union and taking Crimea with it.
1991
January: The Crimean government hold a referendum asking if Crimea should declare its independence from Ukraine, reform itself as the Crimean Soviet Socialist Republic (as it had been prior to 1945), and rejoin the USSR. The vote passes with 94% support, and Crimea declares independence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Crimean_sovereignty_referendum
February: The Ukrainian parliament recognises this independence, passing the “Law On Restoration of the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialistic Republic as part of USSR”.
September: Ukrainian parliament reverses their February decision and declares Crimea a part of Ukraine once again. There is historical debate over the legality of this decision.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, and official Ukrainian independence, Crimea is no longer politically unified with Russia for the first time in over 200 years.
1992
Crimean parliament again declares itself independent as “The Republic of Crimea”, they draft their own constitution and plan a referendum on secession from Ukraine. The Ukrainian parliament refuses to acknowledge the declaration and forces the cancellation of the referendum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Autonomous_Republic_of_Crimea
As a compromise, Crimea is granted special status as an “Autonomous Republic”, and given control over its own budget and other devolved powers, as long as they add a line to their constitution designating Crimea a part of Ukraine.
1994
Newly-elected President Yuriy Meshkov of Crimea holds a referendum, asking the population of Crimea three questions, most notably:
1. Do you support a return to the May 1992 constitution that didn’t guarantee Crimea was part of Ukraine?
2. Do you support establishing that all Crimean citizens were entitled to dual citizenship with Russia?
All three parts of the referendum pass with at least 77% of the vote, and President Meshkov restores the old constitution. The Ukrainian government declares the referendum illegal and refuses to recognise either the results or the new constitution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Crimean_referendum
1995
Ukrainian government abolishes the post of President of Crimea, and cuts the powers of their parliament. For the rest of the year the President of Ukraine governs the peninsula by decree.
2001
The 2001 Ukrainian census records that over 60% of the population of Crimea describe themselves as ethnically Russian. In total 77% of Crimeans, and over 94% of the people of Sevastopol, reported being native Russian speakers.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/44123/9789241547680_eng.pdf
2004
Following the “Orange Revolution”, and over-turning of Viktor Yanukovych’s victory in the Presidential election, leaders of Eastern Ukrainian oblasts – including Crimea – raise the issue of increased autonomy and even secession from the country. A conference of politicians from the Donbas region call for a referendum on federalization, but are ignored.
https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-social-sciences/government- society/polsis/staff/wolczuk/Reading-WolczukWhoseUkraine.pdf
2006
A US Navy ship docks at the Crimean port of Feodosiya, leading to mass protests on the peninsula and a peaceful blockade of the port. Then-leader of the opposition Viktor Yanukovych claims that allowing foreign military units onto Crimea’s soil without consulting the regional parliament is a violation of both the Ukrainian and Crimean
constitutions. A contemporary Radio Free Europe article notes that 55-60% of all Ukrainians oppose joining NATO.
https://www.rferl.org/a/1068836.html
2008
Following the Russo-Georgian war, and on the back of increased calls for Ukraine to join NATO, the BBC sends a reporter to Crimea. Their article details the strong pro- Russian feeling on the peninsula, the key part Sevastopol has played in Russia’s history, and warnings from Crimeans that “nationalists in Kiev” are trying to “force Russians out”.
A 2008 poll by the Ukrainian Centre for Economic and Political Studies found 64% of Crimeans favored secession from from Ukraine to rejoin Russia, and 55% favored increased autonomy from Kiev.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7622520.stm
2009-2011
Between 2009 and 2011 the United Nations Development Program conducts a series of polls in Crimea on the question of Russian reunification. Every single poll returns 65-70% positive response, with another 16-25% undecided and only 9-14% favoring staying with Ukraine.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140502000238/http://www.undp.crimea.ua/img/ content/file/monitoring_ru_2009_10-12.pdf
2013
A poll done by the US-based Gallup agency finds 82% of Crimeans speak only Russsian at home, and further 6% speak Russian and one other language. Only 2% report speaking only Ukrainian.
The pro-EU/pro-NATO Maidan protests begin, violence erupts in Kiev.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Crimea#cite_note-Gallup2013-28 2014
27/1 – As protests intensify in Kiev and Ukraine becomes increasingly unstable, local officials in Simferopol and Sevastopol propose Crimea become a federal state, and prepare legal groundwork:
to use its right to self-determination and to exit Ukraine’s legal space in the event of a state coup, or seizure of power by force.”
28/1 – An open letter from the Sevastopol city council calls on President Yanukovych to outlaw the “extremist group” Svoboda, and invites the people of the city to form “People’s Squads” as described under Ukrainian law, and defend the border of Crimea:
It is impossible to allow specially trained and armed militants of the “Right Sector” and other pro-fascist and extremist organizations to penetrate our city and dictate their terms. We will provide reliable defense of Sevastopol. Extremism, lawlessness, banditry will not pass in the hero city.
https://new-sebastopol.com/news/novosti_sevastopolya/ Sevastopolskiy_gorsovet_obratilsya_k_vlastyam_Ukraini_s_trebovaniem_zapretit_deyat elnost_VO_Svoboda
FEBRUARY
14/2 – Yahoo News reports “Ukraine’s autonomous Crimea region leans towards Moscow “. The article notes that the Crimean parliament amended the constitution to describe Russia as a “guarantor of Crimea’s safety”, and that elected officials have asked Russia for help if the Maidan protesters should attempt to move into Crimea.
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/ukraine-39-autonomous-crimea-region-leans-towards- moscow-165321197.html
18/2 – Radio Free Europe reports on the “rise of pro-Russian separatism in Crimea”. They interview Crimean MP Sergei Shuvainikov, who claims the Ukrainian nationalists want to ban the Russian language and kill Russian culture in Ukraine.
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-crimea-rising-separatism/25268303.html
20/2 – Crimean MP and Speaker of Parliament tells an international meeting in Moscow that Crimea “may secede form Ukraine, if the country splits”.
https://www.kyivpost.com/article/content/ukraine-politics/konstantynov-crimea-may- secede-from-ukraine-if-country-splits-337212.html
22/2 – Less than 24 hours after signing a peace deal, Maidan protesters storm government buildings in Kiev and take control of the country. President Yanukovych flees to Kharkiv.
In a vote that violates the consitution of Ukraine, the Rada removes Yanukovych from office for being “unable to carry out his duties”.
The same day, The Washington Post publishes this article:
“The battle for Kiev is over, is the battle for Crimea about to begin?”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/02/22/the-battle-for-kiev- may-well-be-over-but-is-the-battle-for-crimea-about-to-begin/
23/2 – One of the first bills passed by the new government repeals the law making Russian an official state language. Neo-Nazi leaders Oleh Tyanobohk and Dimitri Yarosh propose going further and banning both the Party of the Regions and the Ukrainian Communist Party, both traditionally political parties representing Eastern Ukraine, including Crimea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Language_policy_in_Ukraine#:~:text=Since%20then%20various%20cities%20and,vot ed%20to%20repeal%20the%20law.
The same day, thousands of Crimeans attend a protest in Sevastopol, chanting about re-uniting with Russia. The Guardian headlines “Ukraine crisis fuels secession calls in pro-Russian south”, reporting that when the Crimean Prime Minister ruled out secession in his speech he was booed by the crowd.
https://www.dumptheguardian.com/world/2014/feb/23/ukraine-crisis-secession- russian-crimea
26/2 – Crimean parliament meets in a special session to discuss the crisis and situation in Kiev. Thousands rally outside the building as the meeting is taking place, chanting “Russia! Russia! Russia!” and “Crimea Rise Up!”
The Parliamentary speaker emerges from the session to address the crowd, saying:
I share your alarm and worry over Crimea’s fate... We will fight for our autonomous republic to the end... Today Kiev doesn’t want to solve our problems, therefore we must unite and act decisively. The people of Crimea have enough strength. Neo- Nazism will not work in Crimea. We will not betray Crimea.”
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/crimea-vows-to-resist-ukraine-s-anti- russian-revolution-1.1704466
The Irish Times reports “Many Russian-speakers worry that Ukraine’s new government will be pulled to the right by ultra-nationalist groups that played a major role in the protests”.
http://https//www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/crimea-vows-to-resist-ukraine-s- anti-russian-revolution-1.1704466
28/2 – In the early hours of Friday 28th February, men in fatigues bearing no insignia take control of every airport, seaport, train station and border crossing on the Crimean peninsula. They also secure all government buildings in Simferopol. These men are later revealed to be Russian troops from the bases at Sevastopol.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/24/ukraine-crimea-russia-secession
Kiev and their NATO backers call the troops’ presence an invasion, but Russia defends their deployment, claiming the troops are there at the invitation of both the local Crimean authorities and Viktor Yanukovych, whom they still recognise as the legitimate President of Ukraine.
Further, the Russians claim their lease agreement allowed up to 25,000 Russian military personnel to be stationed in Crimea, and they did not exceed that number.
https://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-us-intelligence-russia- ukraine-20140303-story.html
With the peninsula effectively cut off from mainland Ukraine, a second special session of Parliament is held, during which they vote to terminate the current government and choose a new Prime Minister. They also established plans for an independence referendum to be held in May.
March
11/3 – Crimean parliament, along with the Sevastopol city council, issue a decree declaring Crimea independent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Declaration_of_Independence_of_the_Republic_of_Crimea
The new Autonomous Republic of Crimea brings forward the planned referendum from May to March 16th, changing the question from one of independence to a choice between re-joining Russia or re-joining Ukraine.
12/3 – The Crimean government formally invite members from the OSCE to observe the referendum and make sure its fair. The OSCE describes the vote as “illegal”, and refuses to attend.
https://www.rferl.org/a/osce-crimea-ukraine-referendum/25292116.html
https://www.firstpost.com/world/crimea-referendum-illegal-no-osce-monitoring- swiss-1429931.html
[Note: remember that this offer was made during an illegal COUP in Kiev that the OSCE apparently had no problem with!]
16/3 – The referendum goes ahead, with the ballot papers asking:
* Do you support the reunification of Crimea with Russia with all the rights of the federal subject of the Russian Federation?
* Do you support the restoration of the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea in 1992 and the status of the Crimea as part of Ukraine?
Though official observers from both the OSCE and UN refused to take part, the Crimean authorities claimed to have invited 190 independent observers from 23 different countries, including the majority of the nations of th EU.
Kiev, along with most western governments, claim the vote is illegitimate because it took place “at the barrel of a gun”.
The reported results are massively in favour of joining Russia, 97% vs 3% against, on an estimated turnout of 83%.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/16/ukraine-russia-truce-crimea- referendum
21/3 – President Vladimir Putin of Russia officially signs the law recognising Crimea as part of the Russian Federation. Street parties are held in Sevastopol and Simferopol, and all across Russia.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2586559/Streets-Crimea-erupt-celebration- residents-gather-celebrate-independence-referendum-world-condemned-illegal.html
April
Claiming they are owed money, the Ukrainian government closes dam on North Crimea Canal, reducing flow of fresh water to the peninsula. Access to water is protected by article 29 of the Geneva convention, and its use to punish a civilian population could be a warcrime.
https://tass.com/russia/729854? utm_source=tass.ru&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=tass.ru&utm_referrer=tass. ru
2015
Forbes publishes this article, headlined “One Year After Russia Annexed Crimea, Locals Prefer Moscow”, it details all the polling done by Western polling agencies since the referendum:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2015/03/20/one-year-after-russia-annexed- crimea-locals-prefer-moscow-to-kiev/?sh=56c19d4c510d
A Gallup study from June 2014 found 83% Crimeans agreed with the result of the referendum, including 94% of ethnic Russians. 74% said being part of Russia would make life better for them and their families.
https://www.usagm.gov/wp-content/media/2014/06/Ukraine-slide-deck.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum#UN_member_states
In January 2015, a joint German-Canadian study done by GfK for “Free Crimea”, found 82% of Crimeans fully supported the referendum and thought Crimea had made the right choice, with another 11% partially supporting it and only 4% opposing it.
[Link contained in main piece - Facebook won’t allow 🙄 ]
A Pew Research study from 2014 found 91% of Crimeans thought the vote was free and fair, and 88% thought Kiev should recognise the results.
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2014/05/08/despite-concerns-about-governance- ukrainians-want-to-remain-one-country/
A US government-funded study published on the Soros-backed OpenDemocracy website found 84% of Crimeans “absolutely” supported the Crimean referendum, and 88% thought Crimea was moving in the right direction.
https://web.archive.org/web/20160722133509/https://www.opendemocracy.net/od- russia/john-o%25E2%2580%2599loughlin-gerard-toal/crimean-conundrum
The US destruction of the Ukraine and the 40-50% of the population who had always rejected them. ———————————————————————————————————— Ukraine has a population of 41 million.
17% (7 million) of that population see themselves as Russian.
Over 2 million voted for the far right “Svoboda or Freedom Party” in 2012.
The (what is seen as) pro Russian “Party of Regions”, which would be ousted in a coup in 2014, received over 6 million votes.
The Ukrainian vote is undoubtedly split down the middle, especially by region, but how can a supposedly pro-Russian party gain an overwhelming majority given that they make up just 17% of the population?
The middle ground.
The Ukrainian “Orange Revolution” of 2004 was a western backed movement to oust elected president Viktor Yanukovych.
By 2009, Yanukovych had worked to rebuild his reputation, becoming the country’s most trusted politician (34%).
The least trusted politician was the “Orange Revolution” installed President Viktor Yushchenko, who was distrusted by 87.4%.
https://www.kyivpost.com/article/content/ukraine-politics/poll-yanukovych-most- trusted-politician-in-ukraine-42342.html
On 14 February 2010, Yanukovych was declared President-elect and winner with 48.95% of the popular vote. 45.47% for leading opposition figure Yulia Tymoshenko.
The EU recognized the elections as “free and fair” https://euobserver.com/foreign/29431
The election was described as an “impressive display” of democracy. But once in power, Yanukovych’s rule was again marred by (alleged) widespread corruption, authoritarianism.
[Note: Nobody denies the corruption. Which political leader *isn’t* a slimy scumbag? Remember, I have no intention to whitewash anybody BUT to show what MOST Ukrainians felt during these years.]
Most voters weren’t as interested in the “East v West” tug of war as is made out:
“But... many Ukrainian voters are likely to be more interested in kitchen sink issues - how to stop the country's economy from collapsing and how to pay for Russian gas - than in post-Soviet power games...”
https://euobserver.com/foreign/29431
https://www.oscepa.org/en/news-a-media/press-releases/press-2010/international- observers-say-ukrainian-election-was-free-and-fair
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/feb/08/viktor-yanukovych-ukraine-president- election
One of Viktor Yanukovych’s *campaign promises* was to prevent Ukraine from becoming a member in NATO.
A PEW poll the year before found that the majority of Ukrainians were opposed to joining NATO.
51% against and only 28% for. With 51% finding NATO “unfavorable” and 31% “favorable”.
And it wasn’t just the (Russian) East Ukrainians (72%-11%) who opposed it. Ukrainians in the South (60%-11%) and Central (51%-33%) were opposed to it.
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2010/03/29/ukraine-says-no-to-nato/
“Meanwhile, Yanukovych worked with and publicly encouraged Western involvement in updating Ukraine’s natural gas infrastructure and insisted again and again that “European integration is the key priority of our foreign policy.””
https://web.archive.org/web/20100909081108/http:/www.neurope.eu/articles/Now-or- Never-for-Ukraines-Gas-Transit-Pipelines/102393.php
https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/ukraine-s-yanukovich-pledges-to- work-for-eu-integration/
His promises about European integration came at a time when the IMF was demanding severe austerity measures in return for an EU loan. This at a time when Ukrainians were already on their knees:
“He kept working toward European Union membership, and to that end pursued a free trade agreement with the EU as well as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) loan the West urged him to take.
That financial lifeline came with a heavy price familiar to the many poor countries that have turned to the West for bailouts: the elimination of tariffs, a wage and pension freeze, spending cuts, and the end of gas subsidies to Ukrainian households. The grim potential of such Western-imposed austerity, on display for all to see in Greece at the time, was presumably worth it to Yanukovych if it kept Moscow’s nose out of his business.”
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2013/12/21/ russias_austerityfree_loan_leaves_ukraine_in_a_bind_editorial.html
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/06/debt-crisis-global-south-poverty- unemployment-working-class
In 2012, Yanukovych’s Party of the Regions secured victory in the parliamentary elections, *increasing* its number of seats and seeing its biggest rival, Arseniy Yatsenyuk‘s Batkivshchyna (Fatherland) party lose 55 seats.
[Note: Yatsenyuk, who had just took a nosedive in seats, was the newly installed president after the 2014 coup.]
The elections also mark the first time Ukraine elected a far-right MP to its parliament, with Oleh Tyahnybok’s Svoboda party winning 37 seats and over 10% of the vote (entirely from the ethnically Ukrainian west of the country).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Ukrainian_parliamentary_election
In November 2013, “Pro European” demonstrations began in Maidan square. A poll run by the Kyiv Post found an *even split* on joining the EU vs the Eurasian customs union: 39% for, 37% against.
https://www.kyivpost.com/article/content/ukraine-politics/poll-ukrainian-public-split- over-eu-customs-union-options-332470.html
[Note: Before and during this period, a trilateral deal involving Ukraine, Russia and the EU was rejected by the EU. And a more favorable loan deal by Putin. The EU and IMF wanted an “all or nothing” deal.]
In December 2013, Putin made a very attractive offer of a $15 billion loan deal, and $5 billion worth of cheaper gas deals to save the Ukrainian economy:
“With Ukraine on the verge of running out of money to service its debt in the coming months, Putin has just come through with a $20 billion-plus lifeline that Europe and the International Monetary Fund could have provided, but didn’t. It takes the form of a Russian loan worth $15 billion and a big break on gas prices.
For the sin of declining a Western aid package loaded with austerity measures, and accepting instead an unencumbered Russian package, Yanukovych became a target for U.S. regime change.”
https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2013/12/17/ russia_and_ukraine_sign_multibilliondollar_bond_gas_deal.html
A survey was conducted by two reliable research centers in a period from January 24 to February 1, 2014:
“Thoughts of the Ukrainians about protests were divided almost equally. Number of respondents who supports the protest intentions of citizens is almost 47% (26.8% - fully support, 20.9% - rather support). Do not support the protests - 46% (31.3% - do not support, 14.8% - rather not).”
The following is important to remember given what followed in the days ahead:
“The vast majority of citizens (63.3%) believes that to gain a positive outcome of the protest, the public negotiations with authorities should be held, and only 11.1% think that it is better to the use the force.”
[Note: Even in the midst of the protests, and shortly before the coup, Yanukovych was STILL the popular vote in the event of elections. Even if it was a very close race with the closest opposition leader. The third “candidate”, Poroshenko received 13%. So, there existed the possibility of an alliance to oust Yanukovych. The soon to be installed leader, Yatsenyuk, received just 6.4%. The US didn’t WANT elections. They wanted a coup. There were 28% “undecided”. AND Putin had just offered a very generous financial incentive. The US didn’t want to take the risk.]:
“As for the electoral preferences in the presidential elections, electoral orientation of the Ukrainians divided as follows: if presidential elections were held next Sunday, 20,9% would support the current president Viktor Yanukovych , 20.1% would vote for V. Klitschko, and 13,0% - for P.Poroshenko. A.Yatsenyuk, in turn, would receive 6.4% of the votes, the leader of the Communist Party P.Symonenko - 3.8%, and the leader of UU "Svoboda" Tyahnybok - 2.8%.
About 28% of voters said they did not know whom to vote for, and they were not sure whether they would come to the elections.
As for the electoral preferences regarding parties, electoral orientation of the Ukrainians divided as follows: Yanukovych’s Party of Regions takes the first place with 21,9% of voters, party “Udar” – 17,0%
The respondents in the survey identified further course of foreign policy, which Ukraine should follow. Thus, 55.2% of citizens support Ukraine's accession to the European Union, and 44.8% would vote for joining the Customs Union, if such a referendum was held in the near future.
http://www.kiis.com.ua/?lang=eng&cat=reports&id=227&page=1
25/1/2014 – President Yanukovych reaches out to opposition leaders, offering them a power-sharing agreement that would install Yatseniyuk as Prime Minister and Vitaliy Klitschko as his deputy. The opposition refused the offer.
https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-opposition-shuns-yanukovych-power-share-offer/ a-17387381
28/1/2014 – In a gesture of compromise, the parliament repeals 9 of the ten protest laws, passing a new law granting amnesty to all those involved in the protests, providing they cease occupying government buildings. The oppostion refuses these terms.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25955644
16/2/2014 – In yet another attempt at compromise, the government releases all prisoners arrested during the protests, this time the opposition responds, lifting their 3- month long occupation of Kiev City Hall.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/16/kiev-protesters-leave-city-hall
[Note: Remember that an earlier survey showed that 63% of protesters believed “that to gain a positive outcome of the protest, the public negotiations with authorities should be held, and only 11.1% think that it is better to the use the force.”]
19/2/2014 – President Yanukovych declares a “truce” in a joint statement signed by the three main opposition leaders. The statement committed to negotiation for a lasting peace.
https://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/19/world/europe/ukraine-protests/index.html
February 20, 2014 – Foreign ministers from Poland, Germany and France visiting Kiev secured President Yanukovych’s agreement that would commit the government to an interim administration, constitutional reform and new parliamentary and presidential elections.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/20/ukraine-eu-foreign-ministers-agree- sanctions-officials
[Note: Yanukovych had basically met ALL of the demands. But it wasn’t enough.]
With “no clear sign that EU or US pressure has achieved” the desired effect, opposition leaders rejected Yanukovych’s compromise which would have ended the three month stand-off.
https://www.ft.com/content/7be2df76-8617-11e3- b30d-00144feab7de#axzz2uqSgRPgy
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called on the German, French and Polish foreign ministers to step in and take responsibility for upholding the deal they helped forge and not let “armed extremists” directly threaten Ukrainian sovereignty.
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/ukraine-protesters-take-kiev-president-says- coup-551647
The US and others decide to use a wrecking ball approach in the midst of the reconciliation by murdering both protesters and police using snipers. And ushered in the coup pushed in by the 11% in favour of violence. The extreme right.
20/2/2014 – Snipers open fire on the crowd in Maidan Square, resulting in at least sixty deaths (read thread here):
https://www.facebook.com/1473971445/posts/10227668680330574/
With Yanukovych out, the interim government and Washington’s handpicked prime minister signed the EU deal whose rejection had started it all, solidifying Ukraine’s move to the West, and ushering in the brutal austerity measures demanded by the IMF.
Over the years, Yanukovych’s successor, Poroshenko, signed off on a round of privatization, raised the pension age, and slashed gas subsidies, urged on by then vice president Joe Biden.
https://www.kyivpost.com/business/poroshenko-signs-law-privatization-says-russian- money-will-not-involved.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-election-economy-insight/no-gas-no- votes-subsidy-cuts-imperil-ukraine-leaders-reelection-bid-idUSKCN1QH0TF
As late as 2017, almost all of the (genuine) protesters’ demands have gone unfulfilled. - law enforcement and special services reform
- judicial reform
- anticorruption legislation
- Anti-elitism in politics
- Investigation of the events at Euromaidan
https://euromaidanpress.com/2018/02/21/the-top-5-unfulfilled-demands-of-ukraines- euromaidan-revolution/
Unsurprisingly in 2019, Ukrainians threw Poroshenko out in a landslide.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-election-poroshenko-newsmaker/ukraines- action-man-president-faces-voters-judgment-idUSKCN1R80LB
https://graphics.reuters.com/UKRAINE-ELECTION/010090W9135/index.html
Little to nothing has changed about Ukrainian corruption or authoritarianism, under either Poroshenko or current president Volodymyr Zelensky, elected in 2019.
Each has governed like an autocrat, using their powers to go after political opponents and weaken dissent.
https://www.kyivpost.com/article/opinion/editorial/budding-autocrat.html
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-zelensky’s-ukraine-becoming-increasingly- autocratic-182124
And have been embroiled in personal enrichment scandals that remain endemic to the Ukrainian political class.
https://eurasianet.org/a-brief-history-of-corruption-in-ukraine-the-poroshenko-era
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/5/pandora-papers-no-re-election-for- ukraines-comedian-president
Zelensky’s name was on a recent list by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists’ Pandora Papers.
https://www.icij.org/investigations/pandora-papers/global-investigation-tax-havens- offshore/
A report published September 23 2021 by the European Court of Auditors on corruption in Ukraine said that between 2016 and 2020, the three main obstacles to economic growth were the same as they were pre-Maidan movement, when people were protesting in favor of a push towards EU integration. The perception was that corruption, no trust in the courts, and market monopolies (state capture by a few private business owners) were major obstacles to modernizing Ukraine.
https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=59383
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2021/10/14/ukraine-2021-the-crisis- continues/?sh=2d456e974a8a
Nothing changed except one section of Ukrainian society, the “pro-Russian” or “anti- far right” being marginalized, demonized, and eventually slaughtered. The middle ground was swallowed up. And the failed political parties with their far right enforcers danced to the US/NATO tune of antagonization, corruption and nullifying everybody else. That is, almost 50% percent of Ukrainian society who didn’t want the mess the US and NATO have created.
So when western media says they “Stand with Ukraine”, they had already discounted 7 million Russian Ukrainians by ignoring the purge against them since 2014 leading to 14,000 deaths, know that they’re discounting millions more.
The Ukraine they speak of is roughly half of the population.
