For How Much Are They Selling Ukraine?
Published in Rossiyskaya Gazeta
(Russia) on 3 February 2014
by Yevgeny Shestakov (link to original)
The opposition has reached an agreement with the U.S. secretary of state on a way out of the crisis in Ukraine. According to the leader of the “Batkivshchyna” Party, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the plan approved by John Kerry includes the formation of a government from representatives of the opposition, the adoption of constitutional reforms and the subsequent provision of an economic aid package by the U.S., the EU and the International Monetary Fund.
There was not a single word about the upcoming democratic election and a government that would unify the nation. The right of the Ukrainian people to choose a path of development independently without outside advice has been reduced to a minority opposition group in parliament declaring that they will now control the government according to a plan imposed on them from Washington and Brussels. A couple of opposition politicians — one of whom, Vitali Klitschko, pays taxes not in his motherland but in the U.S. — has sold Ukraine’s sovereignty in anticipation of future American aid.
Before the start of the talks with the secretary of state, Yatsenyuk stated that the West should put together a Marshall Plan for Kiev. The plan, as you may recall, was prepared by the Americans after World War II for the defeated, ruined Germany. But independent, economically successful Ukraine, with its population of 45 million, did not lose a war to anyone. Nevertheless, the liberals have voluntarily made an offer to Washington to buy the country, turning it into a de facto new U.S. state for many decades to come.
The secretary of state did not refuse the generous offer made in Munich. In the best traditions of American political theater, Kerry called the coup that the adherents of a few pro-European parties have been trying to carry out with the support of fascist nationalists “a fight by the vast majority of Ukrainians for the democratic future ... of Europe.”*
Not for its own future, but specifically for the future of the Old World — a curious yet accurate slip of the tongue. The example of postwar Germany demonstrated how, in the years following the adoption of the Marshall Plan, Washington interfered in German affairs, stationed its military bases in the country, dictated policy decisions and used Germany as a market for its goods. The unprecedented spying on German Chancellor Angela Merkel by the U.S. National Security Agency is but the latest example. Even after the facts were revealed, the White House refused to promise not to spy on its European ally in the future.
Now, with a nod from Ukraine’s liberals, Washington has a unique chance to bring Ukraine under its control by installing a government in Kiev that is dependent on American interests. And the liberals have signed on to this “Munich Agreement.”
Next week, a delegation from the European Union and U.S. will arrive in Kiev. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland will be among the significant figures — the same Nuland who, together with the U.S. ambassador to Kiev, handed out cookies to law enforcement officers. The State Department’s website reports that Nuland will have meetings with representatives of the government, the opposition, civil society and business leaders to urge them to agree on a new government and a plan of action. The assistant secretary of state is heading to the capital of a foreign government to form a cabinet that suits the White House and does not hide in the slightest the task before her. There is no one in Ukraine to stop this obstinate lady and explain to her that the country is not a colony she can come to whenever she pleases.
EU High Representative Catherine Ashton and EU Commissioner Stefan Fule have planned to visit Ukraine next week. This is the very same Fule who was responsible for Ukraine’s association agreement with the European Union and threatened Kiev with sanctions if it refused to sign an economically disadvantageous agreement. The opposition invited these gentlemen to Ukraine but the authorities did not. But such trivial details do not bother high-ranking European functionaries. After all, they feel like they are in charge in Kiev — like they are right at home.
Over the weekend, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) opened a criminal investigation into attempts to seize state power. Among the evidence are materials from the servers of the opposition group “Batkivshchyna,” which prove that Yanukovych’s opponents were preparing in advance for an armed confrontation. Immediately after the information surfaced, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, head of the party, flew to Munich. He demanded an international investigation of the facts given by the SBU with the participation of ... the chief political strategists and sponsors of the unrest in Ukraine. Yatsenyuk is sure that they will get the perpetrators off the hook: After all, in the event of an objective investigation into the unrest taking place in Ukraine, some of the participants of the yet-to-come “Western landing force” would, upon arrival on Ukrainian soil, be put behind bars for complicity in the coup and not sit at the negotiating table as mediators, appointed by God knows whom, between the Ukrainian authorities and the opposition.
Washington and Brussels do not hide the fact that the purpose of their massive “invasion” of Ukraine is the formation of a pro-European government that will free former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and sign an association agreement with the European Union.
Before the start of the Munich conference, the U.S. secretary of state held a conference call with significant figures of the Maidan protest in which, in addition to nationalist leader Oleg Tyagnibok, pop singer Ruslana (the future minister of culture?), former Minister of Internal Affairs Yuriy Lutsenko (the future minister of internal affairs?) and deputy Petro Poroshenko (the future prime minister?) took part.
In addition to a political component, a pronounced economic component can be seen in Washington’s actions. In 2014, Ukraine will have to pay the International Monetary Fund $3.72 billion, and the next installment of $1.025 billion must be received by the IMF by Feb. 12. According to experts, the country is losing billions of dollars due to the political crisis that caused the resignation of the government. Rating agencies have lowered Kiev’s credit rating, which has led to an increase in the cost of external borrowing. Thus, in seeking a speedy formation of Ukraine’s government, the U.S. State Department is indirectly seeing to the timely repayment of American funds that are at the IMF’s disposal.
For the sake of recouping its investment in Ukraine, the West is ready to close its eyes to many things: swastikas on the Ukrainian opposition’s barricades; priests praying for the annihilation of “Russkies, Chinese, Yids and blacks;” and Lviv officials who came in Nazi military uniforms to the funeral of a former SS man from the Galicia division. European officials do not want to notice that in recent weeks, the very face of the Maidan protests has changed: young people under the flags of the EU dreaming about living as in Europe have been replaced by fascist nationalists under the red and black flags of UNA-UNSO and extremists from “Right Sector.”
If Yatsenyuk and Klitschko refuse to join the new cabinet, the nationalists, by contrast, will gladly take the vacant minister seats as legitimate representatives of the opposition. Such a scenario cannot be excluded. To see a follower of Bandera in the prime minister’s seat in Ukraine — is that not a mockery of U.S. and European politicians who give dissertations about human values and democracy? So in Munich the liberals had an excellent pretext for blackmailing the West, which, from the looks of it, the Ukrainian opposition availed itself of in the talks with Kerry.
On Sunday, U.S. President Barack Obama told the Ukrainians how to reach a compromise. The head of the White House thinks that to do so, the opposition should be involved in governing the country, the cabinet of ministers should be restructured and laws curbing protests and freedom of speech should be repealed. The assistant secretary of state is hurrying to Kiev to realize these plans, while in Munich her boss has nearly convinced the Ukrainian liberals to take positions in the future cabinet so as not to give them up to the nationalists. Otherwise, what started out as a pro-European Maidan might in the end lead to followers of the Third Reich governing Ukraine. And unlike Vitali Klitschko and Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who quaveringly concern themselves with American interests, they might not be so accommodating.
In his speech, President Barack Obama made no mention of the existence in Ukraine of supporters of views on the country’s future that differ from the American view. Did he forget?
*Editor’s Note: The original quotation, accurately translated, could not be verified.
There was not a single word about the upcoming democratic election and a government that would unify the nation. The right of the Ukrainian people to choose a path of development independently without outside advice has been reduced to a minority opposition group in parliament declaring that they will now control the government according to a plan imposed on them from Washington and Brussels. A couple of opposition politicians — one of whom, Vitali Klitschko, pays taxes not in his motherland but in the U.S. — has sold Ukraine’s sovereignty in anticipation of future American aid.
Before the start of the talks with the secretary of state, Yatsenyuk stated that the West should put together a Marshall Plan for Kiev. The plan, as you may recall, was prepared by the Americans after World War II for the defeated, ruined Germany. But independent, economically successful Ukraine, with its population of 45 million, did not lose a war to anyone. Nevertheless, the liberals have voluntarily made an offer to Washington to buy the country, turning it into a de facto new U.S. state for many decades to come.
The secretary of state did not refuse the generous offer made in Munich. In the best traditions of American political theater, Kerry called the coup that the adherents of a few pro-European parties have been trying to carry out with the support of fascist nationalists “a fight by the vast majority of Ukrainians for the democratic future ... of Europe.”*
Not for its own future, but specifically for the future of the Old World — a curious yet accurate slip of the tongue. The example of postwar Germany demonstrated how, in the years following the adoption of the Marshall Plan, Washington interfered in German affairs, stationed its military bases in the country, dictated policy decisions and used Germany as a market for its goods. The unprecedented spying on German Chancellor Angela Merkel by the U.S. National Security Agency is but the latest example. Even after the facts were revealed, the White House refused to promise not to spy on its European ally in the future.
Now, with a nod from Ukraine’s liberals, Washington has a unique chance to bring Ukraine under its control by installing a government in Kiev that is dependent on American interests. And the liberals have signed on to this “Munich Agreement.”
Next week, a delegation from the European Union and U.S. will arrive in Kiev. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland will be among the significant figures — the same Nuland who, together with the U.S. ambassador to Kiev, handed out cookies to law enforcement officers. The State Department’s website reports that Nuland will have meetings with representatives of the government, the opposition, civil society and business leaders to urge them to agree on a new government and a plan of action. The assistant secretary of state is heading to the capital of a foreign government to form a cabinet that suits the White House and does not hide in the slightest the task before her. There is no one in Ukraine to stop this obstinate lady and explain to her that the country is not a colony she can come to whenever she pleases.
EU High Representative Catherine Ashton and EU Commissioner Stefan Fule have planned to visit Ukraine next week. This is the very same Fule who was responsible for Ukraine’s association agreement with the European Union and threatened Kiev with sanctions if it refused to sign an economically disadvantageous agreement. The opposition invited these gentlemen to Ukraine but the authorities did not. But such trivial details do not bother high-ranking European functionaries. After all, they feel like they are in charge in Kiev — like they are right at home.
Over the weekend, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) opened a criminal investigation into attempts to seize state power. Among the evidence are materials from the servers of the opposition group “Batkivshchyna,” which prove that Yanukovych’s opponents were preparing in advance for an armed confrontation. Immediately after the information surfaced, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, head of the party, flew to Munich. He demanded an international investigation of the facts given by the SBU with the participation of ... the chief political strategists and sponsors of the unrest in Ukraine. Yatsenyuk is sure that they will get the perpetrators off the hook: After all, in the event of an objective investigation into the unrest taking place in Ukraine, some of the participants of the yet-to-come “Western landing force” would, upon arrival on Ukrainian soil, be put behind bars for complicity in the coup and not sit at the negotiating table as mediators, appointed by God knows whom, between the Ukrainian authorities and the opposition.
Washington and Brussels do not hide the fact that the purpose of their massive “invasion” of Ukraine is the formation of a pro-European government that will free former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and sign an association agreement with the European Union.
Before the start of the Munich conference, the U.S. secretary of state held a conference call with significant figures of the Maidan protest in which, in addition to nationalist leader Oleg Tyagnibok, pop singer Ruslana (the future minister of culture?), former Minister of Internal Affairs Yuriy Lutsenko (the future minister of internal affairs?) and deputy Petro Poroshenko (the future prime minister?) took part.
In addition to a political component, a pronounced economic component can be seen in Washington’s actions. In 2014, Ukraine will have to pay the International Monetary Fund $3.72 billion, and the next installment of $1.025 billion must be received by the IMF by Feb. 12. According to experts, the country is losing billions of dollars due to the political crisis that caused the resignation of the government. Rating agencies have lowered Kiev’s credit rating, which has led to an increase in the cost of external borrowing. Thus, in seeking a speedy formation of Ukraine’s government, the U.S. State Department is indirectly seeing to the timely repayment of American funds that are at the IMF’s disposal.
For the sake of recouping its investment in Ukraine, the West is ready to close its eyes to many things: swastikas on the Ukrainian opposition’s barricades; priests praying for the annihilation of “Russkies, Chinese, Yids and blacks;” and Lviv officials who came in Nazi military uniforms to the funeral of a former SS man from the Galicia division. European officials do not want to notice that in recent weeks, the very face of the Maidan protests has changed: young people under the flags of the EU dreaming about living as in Europe have been replaced by fascist nationalists under the red and black flags of UNA-UNSO and extremists from “Right Sector.”
If Yatsenyuk and Klitschko refuse to join the new cabinet, the nationalists, by contrast, will gladly take the vacant minister seats as legitimate representatives of the opposition. Such a scenario cannot be excluded. To see a follower of Bandera in the prime minister’s seat in Ukraine — is that not a mockery of U.S. and European politicians who give dissertations about human values and democracy? So in Munich the liberals had an excellent pretext for blackmailing the West, which, from the looks of it, the Ukrainian opposition availed itself of in the talks with Kerry.
On Sunday, U.S. President Barack Obama told the Ukrainians how to reach a compromise. The head of the White House thinks that to do so, the opposition should be involved in governing the country, the cabinet of ministers should be restructured and laws curbing protests and freedom of speech should be repealed. The assistant secretary of state is hurrying to Kiev to realize these plans, while in Munich her boss has nearly convinced the Ukrainian liberals to take positions in the future cabinet so as not to give them up to the nationalists. Otherwise, what started out as a pro-European Maidan might in the end lead to followers of the Third Reich governing Ukraine. And unlike Vitali Klitschko and Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who quaveringly concern themselves with American interests, they might not be so accommodating.
In his speech, President Barack Obama made no mention of the existence in Ukraine of supporters of views on the country’s future that differ from the American view. Did he forget?
*Editor’s Note: The original quotation, accurately translated, could not be verified.