The true architects of the bloodshed and destruction taking place now in eastern Ukraine are the western leaders who now double down, making the extent of that bloodshed and destruction ever greater. Whatever their intent was, well-intentioned or purely based on self-interest they have worked from at least 2004 if not earlier to push Ukraine and Ukrainians in the direction that has now led to the ongoing tragedy we see before us now.
The interfering fingers of the West with almost unlimited financial power behind them have been at work in Ukraine at least since the Orange Revolution that took place in Ukraine in late 2004. Naturally its agents, the CIA, NED (National Endowment for Democracy) and without doubt many others including non-governmental organisations such as Open Society funded by George Soros. The intent behind such interference can be debated, whether it was to spread liberal democracy, or the loosely defined buzzwords of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ the effects have proven to be devastating.
NATO, moving inexorably toward and up to Russia’s border was an outcome that Gorbachev was told would never happen at the time he agreed German reunification could occur without problems from the then Soviet Union. NATO, required new reasons to maintain its existence after the fall of both the Soviet Union and the nations of the Warsaw Pact, found that reason in antagonising Russia. Seen as weak after the soviet Union crumbled, Russia could be manipulated at the will of the western powers, or so they thought. NATO moved toward Russia in tranches, sometimes of several ex-Warsaw Pact nations at once. Why? Who was the enemy they were joining NATO against?
It was announced in 2008 that both Ukraine and Georgia would join NATO at some future date.
This from the NATO bulletin issued at the time of the summit:
‘At the Bucharest Summit, NATO Allies welcomed Ukraine's and Georgia's Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership and agreed that these countries will become members of NATO.’
https://www.nato.int/docu/update/2008/04-april/e0403h.html
As the man who would become today’s CIA director William Burns said at the time this was “the reddest of red lines for Russia”.
During this period a reporter for the New York Times phoned the man who had been the acknowledged architect of the West’s containment policy of the Soviet Union, George Kennan. These are the responses he gave when asked about NATO’s expansion toward Russia:
''I think it is the beginning of a new cold war.'
''I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the Founding Fathers of this country turn over in their graves.''
''I was particularly bothered by the references to Russia as a country dying to attack Western Europe. Don't people understand? Our differences in the cold war were with the Soviet Communist regime. And now we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime.''
''It shows so little understanding of Russian history and Soviet history. Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia, and then [the NATO expanders] will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are -- but this is just wrong.''
''This has been my life, and it pains me to see it so screwed up in the end.''
https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/opinion/foreign-affairs-now-a-word-from-x.html
No matter how those most informed regarding the geopolitical risks spoke out, the requirement that NATO survive trumped all such concerns. And to survive it needed an enemy.
It was in 2007 that Vladimir Putin through an effort to respond to the world situation of that time where the USA and its allies were endlessly flexing their muscles in what has been described as ‘The Unipolar Moment’ when they were unopposed by any other power, that he gave NATO the “enemy” they required.
In his speech on the 10th of February 2007 at the 43rd Munich Security Conference he gave the assurance to the assembled western political elites that Russia would work in close cooperation with all other nations on projects of mutual benefit, such as those regarding international terrorism and nuclear proliferation. These assurances are not recalled these days however and were of course not responsible for Putin and Russia with Putin as president, became NATO’s chance to have the enemy it required.
The words that provided what NATO needed which Putin spoke that day concerned the unwillingness of Russia to be dictated to rather than be embraced as a great power. He spoke of the preemptive wars that the western powers seemed determined to inflict on the world which threatened international law, the status of the United Nations and the sovereignty of nations too weak to withstand western interference. With 9/11 only a few short years earlier this was not what the representatives of the USA wished to hear.
Russia was supposed to stay a weak and cowed power, no longer great and totally subservient to the West, obedient to its will and command, a nation whose leaders would know their place and stay in them, simply waiting to hear what they ought to do next, just one of many led by principally by the USA. However, Putin was in the process of healing Russia, of bringing Russia back to being a viable state after the catastrophic Yeltsin years. Putin was going to make Russia great again.
So it was that NATO continued to expand. No enemy was named but it was clear who the chosen enemy was. And the constant flurry of anti-Putin statements which only began in earnest after 2007 demonstrated the fact. A waterfall of articles, books and television specials targeted Putin after 2007 whereas from 2000 when he first assumed the Russian presidency to his speech in Munich in 2007 he had been wined and dined across the western world, he and his then wife even having an audience with Queen Elizabeth II of England.
This is one of the true principle backdrops to the current state of Ukraine, inexorable movement toward Russia by NATO, endless material, much of it without doubt coordinated by the CIA and other intelligence agencies portraying Putin as a dire threat and a series of dirty tricks/black operations to emphasise and fix this notion of putin as some kind of murderous devil in the minds of every westerner.
So it came to the events in Ukraine’s capital in 2014 when peaceful protests asking for Ukraine to move toward the EU and the West graduated into out and out violent insurrection in which over 15 young policemen died. Government buildings were raided and set on fire. Every possible weapon that could be devised was used from every imaginable club to bricks, toxic sprays, heavy chains, Molotov Cocktails, hand guns, hunting rifles and even a fork lift truck at one point. The president and government who had been elected in what were pronounced by election observers as good enough to be pronounced valid and indicative of public will, were overthrown. And top U.S. officials, both in the capital’s U.S embassy and on the Maidan Square where the insurrection took place, lent their active support.
All of what we see now followed as night follows day. Seeing their democratic right to elect the candidates of their choice torn asunder the Russian-speaking majority in both the Crimean Peninsula and the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine rose up peacefully to attempt a restoration of their democratic rights. They had their own ‘Maidan’, taking matters into their own hands without violence, demanding Russia help them in their hour of need and asserting the need for democratic referenda to reflect their will. These were duly carried out and showed that the people who had long looked east toward Russia still did so and prayed for salvation from the Ukrainian extremists who, backed by the USA and nations of the USA, were clearly determined to strip them not only of their democratic rights but of the language they spoke and the cultural affiliation with Russia that was so dear to them. It must be remembered that being next to the Russian border the people of the Donbass not only spoke Russian and identified themselves as ethnic Russians they were also in so many cases intermarried Russian and Ukrainian.
The new authorities in the capital would have none of this, pushed relentlessly through the pressure and fear emanating from the most extreme of ultra-nationalists in western Ukraine, those who often bear swastika tattoos and revere the memory of Adolf Hitler and still to this day use the Nazi salute, sent the Ukrainian military and assorted ultra-nationalist groupings to ‘deal’ with the problem. This led to the largely random bombardment of the villages, towns and cities of eastern Ukraine. From that time in 2014 when they arrived to the present day somewhere around 16,000 have died.
So we come to February 24th and the Russian incursion into Ukraine. This followed a period from 2014 when Putin and Russia sought a peaceful resolution to the problem of the Donbass, some way whereby the civilian population there could have the protective autonomy that would assure them that their language, cultural affiliations and freedom from attack, could be assured. In 2015, after negotiations between Russia, Germany, France and Ukraine such a plan was devised, or so it seemed. The plan was to lay out a pathway whereby the Donbass region would acquire a ‘special status’ amounting to a high degree of autonomy. Unknown until very recently this was simply a ruse by the western powers and the Ukrainians to buy time in order for Ukraine to rearm.
Angela Merkel of Germany and the ex-president of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko have recently confirmed that the promises given by Ukraine in Minsk were simply a sham used to buy time. Though the agreement reached was ratified by the United Nations it was at its heart a series of lies concocted by Merkel, Poroshenko and others to dupe Russia. Being unaware of this deception and taking the Minsk Agreements as an honest attempt to achieve peace and reconciliation with the Donbass region remaining within Ukraine, Putin worked tirelessly to achieve the goals set out. However no one else did and none of the steps toward peace signed up to by Ukraine were carried out.
Instead Ukraine proceeded to strengthen its military to NATO standards, to rearm and prepare itself to take back the Donbass region by military means. Ukraine became in fact a de facto NATO state. This was the case when the Ukrainian delegation in late 2021 stated that the Minsk Agreements no longer held any validity for them. It was also at this time or thereabouts that the new president, Zelensky talked of regaining Ukraine’s nuclear status.
At this time in late 2021 Putin made a final plea to both the U.S. government and to NATO that one, a new security architecture for Europe be worked on and agreed that also included security for the Russian state along with all others, and two, that NATO move back to the positions it held at the time Gorbachev was assured that NATO would not move a further inch toward Russia.
Both pleas were rejected.
It was shortly thereafter in early 2022 that two further factors that would lead to the events we see now occurring in Ukraine transpired. The first was a major escalation in the shelling of Donbass by Ukrainian forces as reported by the OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe ) who had been tasked with monitoring all such activity since the earliest days of the conflict which began in 2014. The second was the discovery of documents indicating that a military operation to take over the villages, towns and cities of the Donbass was planned for the near future.
Things moved fast then as the representatives of the two Russian-speaking republics of the Donbass appealed to Russia for protection. This was granted and formalised by the signing of the requisite documents in Moscow. Shortly thereafter Russia took the decision it had never wished to take, having refused the pleas of the embattled republics in 2014 to be allowed to join the Russian Federation, having worked tirelessly to see the Minsk Agreements come to fruition and done everything possible to maintain peace in the context of all parties, Russia finally bowed to the inevitable, left with no alternative decent option left to it except to await the Ukrainian assault on its brothers and sisters of the Donbass and see Russia’s security further eroded by having a NATO armed nation on its doorstep in perpetuity, it reluctantly left the only option left available to it and sent its troops into Ukraine to intimidate the Ukrainian regime into a quick settlement.
As we have seen however, this was not to be. The western powers insisted that the Ukrainian president and its military elites use all in their power to win the day through violence. And so it has been from that day to this, from those days of late February to now, only days from this unnecessary conflict’s first anniversary. Every step of the way it has been the western political elites who have fostered war rather than dialogue leading to an agreed peace. In Istanbul in March of last year the two sides came close to an agreement, scuppered by Boris Johnson and Joseph Biden who insisted the war must go on for their own interests and aspirations. At that point it was clear they were willing to fight to the last Ukrainian with a goal that was not truly about Ukraine or any of the reasons they gave on that score, the true goal was simply to weaken Russia as it had been from the start long years before.
These are the many reasons why the guilty party in this unnecessary tragedy that is happening to both Russia and Ukraine is so very obvious. That guilty party consists of the leaders of the western nations who have conspired from the very start of their Ukraine project to do whatever they deemed necessary to strengthen their own position and weaken that of Russia. These are the guilty men and women of the West who will never be brought to court for their crimes and who will instead write their memoirs in an effort to justify their crimes against humanity and the seeming endless suffering of the Ukrainian people.
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment