Streetwise Professor

March 30, 2014

Kerry & Lavrov Negotiate Ukraine’s Surrender in Paris: Were All the Rooms in Munich Booked?

Filed under: History,Military,Politics,Russia — The Professor @ 11:06 am

Following up on Putin’s phone call to Obama, Kerry is making a detour to Paris to negotiate with Lavrov over the fate of Ukraine.

Lavrov has laid out Russia’s terms, and intimates that Obama and Kerry have accepted the principles underlying these terms.

First, Russia demands that Ukraine adopt a new constitution that establishes a federal structure that gives each region considerable autonomy.  Translate this to mean that these regions would be able to pull a Crimea.  Or, more accurately, that Russia would be able to pull a Crimea, slicing off pieces of Ukraine and splicing them onto Russia.

Crucially, Lavrov said: “I can say that ‘federation’ is no longer a taboo word in our negotiations.”  Meaning that if he is telling the truth (always a big if) Obama has conceded that Ukraine’s constitutional order is up for negotiation, on Moscow’s terms.

Second, Russia demands that Ukraine’s new constitution incorporate guarantees that Ukraine will not join Nato or any other alliance.

In brief: the Secretary of State of the United States is traveling to Paris to negotiate the constitution of a sovereign country, without the presence of that country.  The end state of this negotiation would be to turn Ukraine into a Russian satrapy, to be gobbled up piecemeal, and with no ability to conduct an independent foreign policy.

Lavrov’s teaser is that Russia has no intention of invading Ukraine.  But if you read his words closely, you will understand that he means Russia has no intention of invading if its terms are accepted. Otherwise, Ukraine is a fascist, Nazi threat to Russia and to Russian “compatriots.”  And we know what Putin believes such a threat justifies.

The 1930s analogies keep coming, fast and furious. Here the analogy is Munich, where France and Germany negotiated Czechoslovakia’s fate with Hitler, without the Czechs being present.  The Czechs called the agreement the Munich Diktat. Will the Ukrainians call this the Paris Diktat?

There are other similarities.  The pretext of the Germans in 1938 was and Russia in 2014 is the necessity of protecting co-ethnics allegedly threatened by independent nations not invited to the negotiations.  Munich resulted in the handover of the major industrial region of Czechoslovakia to Germany: the likely outcome of an agreement on Putin’s terms would be to handover Ukraine’s main industrial region to Russia. The Munich negotiations took place under the threat of a German invasion of Czechoslovakia if Hitler’s terms were not accepted, and German troops were massed on the border to carry out that threat.  The Paris negotiations are taking place under the threat of a Russian invasion of Ukraine if Putin’s terms are not accepted, and Russian troops are massed on the border with the capability to carry out that threat.

Once upon a time “No More Munichs!” was a catchphrase in US foreign policy. No longer, apparently. Obama and Kerry seem to be saying “Why Not Munich?”

Even if no agreement comes of these talks, or talks that follows, it is deeply shameful that the United States would even engage in such a negotiation on such terms with such a nation.  Deeply shameful.

Print Friendly

56 Comments »

  1. Re “no taboo”, I sure hope this was the tarantula’s way of saying that the words “Russian Federation” were used. Otherwise they are re-running Churchill’s algorithm: choose shame, have war a little later.

    Comment by Ivan — March 30, 2014 @ 11:30 am

  2. @Ivan. Sadly, I believe that Kerry and Obama are definitely running the Churchill algo.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — March 30, 2014 @ 11:47 am

  3. Unfortunately the Ruskies know that they got the kid brigade — no scratch that — the infant brigade in the WH that they might not have in a few years so they’re gonna go for the gusto.

    Terrible circumstances and terrible people to have in office.

    Comment by Dean — March 30, 2014 @ 9:43 pm

  4. “The Munich negotiations took place under the threat of a German invasion of Czechoslovakia if Hitler’s terms were not accepted, and German troops were massed on the border to carry out that threat.”

    And this was a war Adolpf was gonna lose, because his plan divided Germany’s 3 available panzer divisions in 3 efforts instead of massing them for decisive effect. Oh, and Czechoslovakia had more T-35/T-38 than Pz III.

    Did you know that a third of the tanks Adolpf used in the conquest of Western Europe were from Skoda?

    Thus, Neville had to do Munich to break up the Frecnh-Soviet-Czechoslovak alliance that had his initiative paralyzed. Because of that alliance, Czechoslovakia was “…a spearhead in my side” in Adolpf’s own words.

    But since Neville was a Russia-hater, like pretty much everyone here, he was willing to pressure Czechoslovakia to give in so that Russia could be attacked.

    Comment by PailiP — March 31, 2014 @ 3:05 am

  5. PailiP, you do realise the French pushed very hard for Czechoslovakia to give in to Hitler’s demands don’t you?

    Also the French were not at all big fans of Russia at the time, a reason they folded so quickly to Nazi Germany in 1940 was that most Frenchmen considered the Germans would save them from the threat of a Russian inspired communist takeover.

    Comment by Andrew — March 31, 2014 @ 5:08 am

  6. Come now, Munich is sooooo 20th century. since we all live in a virtual world all that is needed is a new SIMS with Russia out of Crimea and having no army. Victory is what we say it is: Obamacare is an astounding success, the recovery is in full swing – just ask Obama!

    In order to deal with reality, one needs to know what it is. With this crew, no such knowledge exists.

    Comment by sotos — March 31, 2014 @ 8:23 am

  7. One of the decisive elements of the 1938/2014 comparison is that in 1938, the French and Brits were still weary of war, not having yet fully recovered from the devastation of WWI. In 2014, the U.S. (especially the Obama supporters) is weary of the involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan and willing to make “reasonable concessions” if doing so would “ensure” non-involvement in a far away conflict that has no obvious and immediately direct effects on the nation.

    Obama’s and Kerry’s natural response may be fecklessness, conciliation and ultimately capitulation, but the fact that the people find the approach favorable to any other is what empowers Putin. While the American people are tired of foreign conflicts, the Russian people are tired of their nation’s ever diminishing status in world affairs. Obama is giving his people exactly what they want. So is Putin.

    Give the people what they want and happiness breaks out around the world. Or, maybe not.

    Comment by Charles — March 31, 2014 @ 8:41 am

  8. Charles, the American people think they are tired of foreign conflicts but objectively, what is there to be tired of? All the recent wars have been fought by professional soldiers with limited loss of life. By contrast, France lost 3.5% of its population in WWI – in today’s America, it’s as if Ohio were wiped out. No social class was exempted so the best and brightest got killed off along with the unwashed and benighted. The bottom line is the French may have been rational pacifiers but the Americans are probably not.

    Comment by Alex K. — March 31, 2014 @ 10:02 am

  9. “Do not hope that by abusing Russia’s weakness you will get dividends forever. Russians always come for their due. And when they do, place no hope on whatever jesuistic agreement you have signed to protect you. It is not worth the paper it is written on. Therefore with the Russians play fair or not at all”.

    /Otto von Bismarck/

    Comment by vlad — March 31, 2014 @ 1:26 pm

  10. Alex, I agree that the sacrifices made by the average American with respect to global conflicts have been negligible. All the same, there is no will among the American people to involve U.S. resources in dealing with a foreign conflict that poses no perceived direct threat to the nation. The left/liberal base is not energized going into midterm elections and control of the Senate at risk, Obama is not going to alienate any of his base by being drawn into an escalating conflict involving Ukraine.

    Putin can annex all of Ukraine, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia, Greece, Turkey and Poland and the American people are going to shrug their shoulders and say that if the EU doesn’t care enough about the problem to use their resources to deal with things, the U.S. shouldn’t yet again solve the problem for them and pay for the cost of doing so. Only a very few Americans will be in favor of using any American resources to yet again play policeman for Europeans who don’t really care about dealing with Putin. The American people are very willing to let Europe deal with its own problems for once. Obama doesn’t have a lot of options between now and early November.

    Comment by Charles — March 31, 2014 @ 2:46 pm

  11. The default attitude among Americans in all crises is to let the world solve it on their own and please don’t involve us. Far sighted political elites know better that sometimes American’s best defense is to make a stand faraway, especially if it is in support for people who only want to live free from tyranny and corruption. All it takes is good leadership. There is a huge difference between asking the American people to go to war with Russia, and asking them to provide sufficient and support short of war to support the Ukrainian democracy. The first won’t happen. The second would be happen very quickly if strong leadership was provided.

    Russia clearly wants a situation where their ability to intervene in Ukrainian domestic politics is institutionalized. This must be avoided at all costs. Hopefully, Obama and Kerry are just playing for time. According to The Interpreter the situation with Russian conscripts mean Russia can only intervene until early May, at which point it won’t be able to do again until the fall. So this would give Ukraine a chance to hold elections and strengthen defenses. Given the abysmal efforts so far, I don’t think this is what is actually happening, but despair is a sin.

    Historical analogies go only so far, so I see litte reason to revisit the actual specifics of the Munich Crisis. However, I see once again reference is made that Britain wanted Hitler to fight the Soviet Union, and this was Britain’s true foreign policy. This is a lie. While there were certainly Tories who would have liked a foreign policy that coddled Nazi Germany provided it attacked the Soviet Union, there is zero evidence that this is what Chamberlain intended or wanted. If it was, Anglo-German or Anglo-Franco-German relations would have been far different 1936-1939. Chamberlain was simply deluded that Hitler’s official pretexts represented true German policy, and that targetted concessions were all that were needed to avoid war and a repeat of the Somme. On the other hand, using Hitler to attack another set of countries on the other side of Europe was Stalin’s actual foreign policy 1939-1941.

    Comment by Chris — March 31, 2014 @ 3:29 pm

  12. Can anyone source that allegedly von Bismarck’s quote? It had been making rounds on Ru.net for quite some time… along with several fake quotes from Churchill, Allen Dulles etc.

    Comment by LL — March 31, 2014 @ 5:50 pm

  13. I think the quote is bullshit. It appears in no compilation of Bismarck quotations. The main Bismarck quote re Russia is “make a good treaty with Russia” line.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — March 31, 2014 @ 8:46 pm

  14. Chris, It is refreshing to finally fine one individual on the planet that believes the United States should be faulted for ignoring foreign conflicts and leaving them to “the world” to solve. It was American involvement in World War I that broke the stalemate. It was the American involvement in World War II that provided the men and material that lead to the allied victory. Korea? Nope, again American involvement. The Suez Crisis. Again, American leadership. American troops in Europe since WW II surely wasn’t “letting the world solve it on its own.” Ditto for Korea. “The world” surely didn’t blunt Russian agitation in Central America in the ’80s. Kuwait in the 1990s? Nope. Bosnia? Nope. Iraq, Afghanistan? Nope?

    I’m at a loss here. Exactly what examples are you relying on to establish the Americans decided to stay out and “let the world solve it on their own”? Exactly what instances are you claiming that the Americans failed to offer sufficient support and forced “the world” to deal with the issue on its own?

    Comment by Charles — March 31, 2014 @ 10:34 pm

  15. For SWP readers, The Onion channels Kerry and Putin, http://www.theonion.com/articles/john-kerry-poses-as-masseuse-to-get-few-minutes-wi,35546/

    Comment by scott — April 1, 2014 @ 2:08 am

  16. @ Charles

    WW1: nope, military contribution absolutely negligible. The chief agent of German defeat was the losses inflicted in 1916-17.

    WW2: who declared war on whom, again?

    Korea: the pre- and post-conflict borders were in the same place. Not exactly a great blow for liberty.

    Suez: not exactly a ringing success as there have been five subsequent wars in the area and it’s still ongoing.

    You forgot Vietnam.

    The Cold War aside, the more usual effect of US intervention – Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan – has been enormous civilian casualties and profound political defeat.

    Comment by Green as Grass — April 1, 2014 @ 7:03 am

  17. “However, I see once again reference is made that Britain wanted Hitler to fight the Soviet Union, and this was Britain’s true foreign policy. This is a lie.”

    “In Government circles I had long listened to calculating arguments for allowing Germany to expand eastwards, for evading our obligations under the League Covenant, and for leaving other countries to bear the brunt of any early stand against aggression.”

    Sir Basil H. Liddell-Hart, “Memoirs” Vol II, pg 221.

    “Chamberlain now asked whether, if Soviet-Czech relations ‘were modified, so that Czechoslovakia were no longer bound to go to the assistance of Russia if Russia were attacked, and on the other hand Czechoslovakia were debarred from giving Russian forces asylum in her aerodromes or elsewhere, would that remove your difficulty?’ ”

    Telford Taylor, “Munich: The Price of Peace”, pg 741.

    At Munich, Chamberlain was concerned to reduce the risks his new friend Adolf would face “…if Russia were attacked…”

    The point that Chamberlain wanted Nazi Germany to fight the Soviet Union is the truth, not a lie.

    Comment by PailiP — April 1, 2014 @ 3:50 pm

  18. Sadly, in the MSM presently, almost the only thing you hear about Ukraine is what the Russians want to talk about. Too bad there aren’t more stories like this:

    http://maidantranslations.com/2014/04/02/known-russian-fascist-aleksandr-dugin-instructs-ukrainian-separatists/

    Comment by Gordon — April 1, 2014 @ 8:51 pm

  19. I see no contradiction between Chris’ and Charles’ statements. The default American attitude, almost a reflex, could indeed be isolationism BUT it can be overcome with a strong case for war. Such case is typically made in emotional terms prior to military action, which often leads to disappointment later on when the costs of war become clear but not yet its benefits. A post-war cost-benefit analysis is a difficult but worthwhile exercise. For one, I don’t see the Iraq war as a disaster. Not only did it remove Saddam, but it also put a major oil province – Saudi Arabia’s potential rival – under Western, mostly American control.

    Comment by Alex K. — April 2, 2014 @ 1:43 am

  20. “For one, I don’t see the Iraq war as a disaster. Not only did it remove Saddam, but it also put a major oil province – Saudi Arabia’s potential rival – under Western, mostly American control.”

    Ummm, yeah, We control Iraq so well that it enthusiastically allows Iran to send personnel and material through Iraq to Syria, and signs arms deals with Russia.

    Geeeeze…..

    Comment by PailiP — April 2, 2014 @ 3:21 am

  21. Alex, You forgot to mention one of the most important results of America’s taking Saddam out which was to push Gaddafi to end his nuclear program and to turn over the materials for destruction. Once Gaddafi saw what happened to Saddam, he correctly figured out it was just a matter of time until the Americans moved to topple him, also. Imagine the Middle East today if he had continued to develop nuclear weapons.

    I disagree that the American reflex has been isolationism. Other than the conflict between the Hutus/Tutsis and the Spanish Civil War, over the past 90 years has there been any large scale armed conflict in which the Americans weren’t involved in a major role either as a supplier of material if not as an active participant?

    Comment by Charles — April 2, 2014 @ 6:57 pm

  22. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37752.htm

    Is the U.S. Backing Neo-Nazis in Ukraine?

    Exposing troubling ties in the U.S. to overt Nazi and fascist protesters in Ukraine.

    By Max Blumenthal

    February 25, 2014 “Information Clearing House – As the Euromaidan protests in the Ukrainian capitol of Kiev culminated this week, displays of open fascism and neo-Nazi extremism became too glaring to ignore. Since demonstrators filled the downtown square to battle Ukrainian riot police and demand the ouster of the corruption-stained, pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovich, it has been filled with far-right streetfighting men pledging to defend their country’s ethnic purity.

    “There are lots of Nationalists here, including Nazis,” the anti-fascist continued. “They came from all over Ukraine, and they make up about 30% of protesters.”

    One of the “Big Three” political parties behind the protests is the ultra-nationalist Svoboda, whose leader, Oleh Tyahnybok, has called for the liberation of his country from the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia.” After the 2010 conviction of the Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk for his supporting role in the death of nearly 30,000 people at the Sobibor camp, Tyahnybok rushed to Germany to declare him a hero who was “fighting for truth.” In the Ukrainian parliament, where Svoboda holds an unprecedented 37 seats, Tyahnybok’s deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is fond of quoting Joseph Goebbels – he has even founded a think tank originally called “the Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center.” According to Per Anders Rudling, a leading academic expert on European neo-fascism, the self-described “socialist nationalist” Mykhalchyshyn is the main link between Svoboda’s official wing and neo-Nazi militias like Right Sector.

    White supremacist banners and Confederate flags were draped inside Kiev’s occupied City Hall, and demonstrators have hoisted Nazi SS and white power symbols over a toppled memorial to V.I. Lenin. After Yanukovich fled his palatial estate by helicopter, EuroMaidan protesters destroyed a memorial to Ukrainians who died battling German occupation during World War II. Sieg heil salutes and the Nazi Wolfsangel symbol have become an increasingly common site in Maidan Square, and neo-Nazi forces have established “autonomous zones” in and around Kiev.

    Right Sector is a shadowy syndicate of self-described “autonomous nationalists” identified by their skinhead style of dress, ascetic lifestyle, and fascination with street violence. Armed with riot shields and clubs, the group’s cadres have manned the front lines of the Euromaidan battles this month, filling the air with their signature chant: “Ukraine above all!” In a recent Right Sector propaganda video [embedded at the bottom of this article], the group promised to fight “against degeneration and totalitarian liberalism, for traditional national morality and family values.” With Svoboda linked to a constellation of international neo-fascist parties through the Alliance of European National Movements, Right Sector is promising to lead its army of aimless, disillusioned young men on “a great European Reconquest.”

    Svoboda’s openly pro-Nazi politics have not deterred Senator John McCain from addressing a EuroMaidan rally alongside Tyahnybok, nor did it prevent Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland from enjoying a friendly meeting with the Svoboda leader this February. Eager to fend off accusations of anti-Semitism, the Svoboda leader recently hosted the Israeli Ambassador to Ukraine. “I would like to ask Israelis to also respect our patriotic feelings,” Tyahnybok has remarked. “Probably each party in the [Israeli] Knesset is nationalist. With God’s help, let it be this way for us too.”

    An Anarchist group called AntiFascist Union Ukraine attempted to join the Euromaidan demonstrations but found it difficult to avoid threats of violence and imprecations from the gangs of neo-Nazis roving the square. “They called the Anarchists things like Jews, blacks, Communists,” one of its members said. “There weren’t even any Communists, that was just an insult.”

    In a leaked phone conversation with Geoffrey Pyatt, the US ambassador to Ukraine, Nuland revealed her wish for Tyahnybok to remain “on the outside,” but to consult with the US’s replacement for Yanukovich, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, “four times a week.” At a December 5, 2013 US-Ukraine Foundation Conference, Nuland boasted that the US had invested $5 billion to “build democratic skills and institutions” in Ukraine, though she did not offer any details.

    “The Euro-Maidan movement has come to embody the principles and values that are the cornerstones for all free democracies,” Nuland proclaimed.

    Two weeks later, 15,000 Svoboda members held a torchlight ceremony in the city of Lviv in honor of Stepan Bandera, a World War II-era Nazi collaborator who led the pro-fascist Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN-B). Lviv has become the epicenter of neo-fascist activity in Ukraine, with elected Svoboda officials waging a campaign to rename its airport after Bandera and successfully changing the name of Peace Street to the name of the Nachtigall Battalion, an OUN-B wing that participated directly in the Holocaust. “’Peace’ is a holdover from Soviet stereotypes,” a Svoboda deputy explained.

    Revered by Ukrainian nationalists as a legendary freedom fighter, Bandera’s real record was ignominious at best. After participating in a campaign to assassinate Ukrainians who supported accommodation with the Polish during the 1930’s, Bandera’s forces set themselves to ethnically cleanse western Ukraine of Poles in 1943 and 1944. In the process, they killed over 90,000 Poles and many Jews, whom Bandera’s top deputy and acting “Prime Minister,” Yaroslav Stetsko, were determined to exterminate. Bandera held fast to fascist ideology in the years after the war, advocating a totalitarian, ethnically pure Europe while his affiliated Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) carried out a doomed armed struggle against the Soviet Union. The bloodbath he inspired ended when KGB agents assassinated him in Munich in 1959.

    The Right Connections

    Many surviving OUN-B members fled to Western Europe and the United States – occasionally with CIA help – where they quietly forged political alliances with right-wing elements. “You have to understand, we are an underground organization. We have spent years quietly penetrating positions of influence,” one member told journalist Russ Bellant, who documented the group’s resurgence in the United States in his 1988 book, “Old Nazis, New Right, and the Republican Party.”

    In Washington, the OUN-B reconstituted under the banner of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA), an umbrella organization comprised of “complete OUN-B fronts,” according to Bellant. By the mid-1980’s, the Reagan administration was honeycombed with UCCA members, with the group’s chairman Lev Dobriansky, serving as ambassador to the Bahamas, and his daughter, Paula, sitting on the National Security Council. Reagan personally welcomed Stetsko, the Banderist leader who oversaw the massacre of 7000 Jews in Lviv, into the White House in 1983.

    “Your struggle is our struggle,” Reagan told the former Nazi collaborator. “Your dream is our dream.”

    When the Justice Department launched a crusade to capture and prosecute Nazi war criminals in 1985, UCCA snapped into action, lobbying Congress to halt the initiative. “The UCCA has also played a leading role in opposing federal investigations of suspected Nazi war criminals since those queries got underway in the late 1970’s,” Bellant wrote. “Some UCCA members have many reasons to worry – reasons which began in the 1930’s.”

    Still an active and influential lobbying force in Washington, the UCCA does not appear to have shed its reverence for Banderist nationalism. In 2009, on the 50th anniversary of Bandera’s death, the group proclaimed him “a symbol of strength and righteousness for his followers” who “continue[s] to inspire Ukrainians today.” A year later, the group honored the 60th anniversary of the death of Roman Shukhevych, the OUN-B commander of the Nachtigall Battalion that slaughtered Jews in Lviv and Belarus, calling him a “hero” who “fought for honor, righteousness…”

    Back in Ukraine in 2010, then-President Viktor Yushchenko awarded Bandera the title of “National Hero of Ukraine,” marking the culmination of his efforts to manufacture an anti-Russian national narrative that sanitized the OUN-B’s fascism. (Yuschenko’s wife, Katherine Chumachenko, was a former Reagan administration official and ex-staffer at the right-wing Heritage Foundation). When the European Parliament condemned Yushchenko’s proclamation as an affront to “European values,” the UCCA-affiliated Ukrainian World Congress reacted with outrage, accusing the EU of “another attempt to rewrite Ukrainian history during WWII.” On its website, the UCCA dismissed historical accounts of Bandera’s collaboration with the Nazis as “Soviet propaganda.”

    Following the demise of Yanukovich this month, the UCCA helped organize rallies in cities across the US in support of the EuroMaidan protests. When several hundred demonstrators marched through downtown Chicago, some waved Ukrainian flags while others proudly flew the red and black banners of the UPA and OUN-B. “USA supports Ukraine!” they chanted.

    Comment by vlad — April 3, 2014 @ 4:12 am

  23. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37752.htm

    Is the U.S. Backing Neo-Nazis in Ukraine?

    Exposing troubling ties in the U.S. to overt Nazi and fascist protesters in Ukraine.

    By Max Blumenthal

    February 25, 2014 “Information Clearing House – As the Euromaidan protests in the Ukrainian capitol of Kiev culminated this week, displays of open fascism and neo-Nazi extremism became too glaring to ignore. Since demonstrators filled the downtown square to battle Ukrainian riot police and demand the ouster of the corruption-stained, pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovich, it has been filled with far-right streetfighting men pledging to defend their country’s ethnic purity.

    “There are lots of Nationalists here, including Nazis,” the anti-fascist continued. “They came from all over Ukraine, and they make up about 30% of protesters.”

    One of the “Big Three” political parties behind the protests is the ultra-nationalist Svoboda, whose leader, Oleh Tyahnybok, has called for the liberation of his country from the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia.” After the 2010 conviction of the Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk for his supporting role in the death of nearly 30,000 people at the Sobibor camp, Tyahnybok rushed to Germany to declare him a hero who was “fighting for truth.” In the Ukrainian parliament, where Svoboda holds an unprecedented 37 seats, Tyahnybok’s deputy Yuriy Mykhalchyshyn is fond of quoting Joseph Goebbels – he has even founded a think tank originally called “the Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center.” According to Per Anders Rudling, a leading academic expert on European neo-fascism, the self-described “socialist nationalist” Mykhalchyshyn is the main link between Svoboda’s official wing and neo-Nazi militias like Right Sector.

    White supremacist banners and Confederate flags were draped inside Kiev’s occupied City Hall, and demonstrators have hoisted Nazi SS and white power symbols over a toppled memorial to V.I. Lenin. After Yanukovich fled his palatial estate by helicopter, EuroMaidan protesters destroyed a memorial to Ukrainians who died battling German occupation during World War II. Sieg heil salutes and the Nazi Wolfsangel symbol have become an increasingly common site in Maidan Square, and neo-Nazi forces have established “autonomous zones” in and around Kiev.

    Right Sector is a shadowy syndicate of self-described “autonomous nationalists” identified by their skinhead style of dress, ascetic lifestyle, and fascination with street violence. Armed with riot shields and clubs, the group’s cadres have manned the front lines of the Euromaidan battles this month, filling the air with their signature chant: “Ukraine above all!” In a recent Right Sector propaganda video [embedded at the bottom of this article], the group promised to fight “against degeneration and totalitarian liberalism, for traditional national morality and family values.” With Svoboda linked to a constellation of international neo-fascist parties through the Alliance of European National Movements, Right Sector is promising to lead its army of aimless, disillusioned young men on “a great European Reconquest.”

    Svoboda’s openly pro-Nazi politics have not deterred Senator John McCain from addressing a EuroMaidan rally alongside Tyahnybok, nor did it prevent Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland from enjoying a friendly meeting with the Svoboda leader this February. Eager to fend off accusations of anti-Semitism, the Svoboda leader recently hosted the Israeli Ambassador to Ukraine. “I would like to ask Israelis to also respect our patriotic feelings,” Tyahnybok has remarked. “Probably each party in the [Israeli] Knesset is nationalist. With God’s help, let it be this way for us too.”

    An Anarchist group called AntiFascist Union Ukraine attempted to join the Euromaidan demonstrations but found it difficult to avoid threats of violence and imprecations from the gangs of neo-Nazis roving the square. “They called the Anarchists things like Jews, blacks, Communists,” one of its members said. “There weren’t even any Communists, that was just an insult.”

    In a leaked phone conversation with Geoffrey Pyatt, the US ambassador to Ukraine, Nuland revealed her wish for Tyahnybok to remain “on the outside,” but to consult with the US’s replacement for Yanukovich, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, “four times a week.” At a December 5, 2013 US-Ukraine Foundation Conference, Nuland boasted that the US had invested $5 billion to “build democratic skills and institutions” in Ukraine, though she did not offer any details.

    “The Euro-Maidan movement has come to embody the principles and values that are the cornerstones for all free democracies,” Nuland proclaimed.

    Two weeks later, 15,000 Svoboda members held a torchlight ceremony in the city of Lviv in honor of Stepan Bandera, a World War II-era Nazi collaborator who led the pro-fascist Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN-B). Lviv has become the epicenter of neo-fascist activity in Ukraine, with elected Svoboda officials waging a campaign to rename its airport after Bandera and successfully changing the name of Peace Street to the name of the Nachtigall Battalion, an OUN-B wing that participated directly in the Holocaust. “’Peace’ is a holdover from Soviet stereotypes,” a Svoboda deputy explained.

    Revered by Ukrainian nationalists as a legendary freedom fighter, Bandera’s real record was ignominious at best. After participating in a campaign to assassinate Ukrainians who supported accommodation with the Polish during the 1930’s, Bandera’s forces set themselves to ethnically cleanse western Ukraine of Poles in 1943 and 1944. In the process, they killed over 90,000 Poles and many Jews, whom Bandera’s top deputy and acting “Prime Minister,” Yaroslav Stetsko, were determined to exterminate. Bandera held fast to fascist ideology in the years after the war, advocating a totalitarian, ethnically pure Europe while his affiliated Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) carried out a doomed armed struggle against the Soviet Union. The bloodbath he inspired ended when KGB agents assassinated him in Munich in 1959.

    The Right Connections

    Many surviving OUN-B members fled to Western Europe and the United States – occasionally with CIA help – where they quietly forged political alliances with right-wing elements. “You have to understand, we are an underground organization. We have spent years quietly penetrating positions of influence,” one member told journalist Russ Bellant, who documented the group’s resurgence in the United States in his 1988 book, “Old Nazis, New Right, and the Republican Party.”

    In Washington, the OUN-B reconstituted under the banner of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA), an umbrella organization comprised of “complete OUN-B fronts,” according to Bellant. By the mid-1980’s, the Reagan administration was honeycombed with UCCA members, with the group’s chairman Lev Dobriansky, serving as ambassador to the Bahamas, and his daughter, Paula, sitting on the National Security Council. Reagan personally welcomed Stetsko, the Banderist leader who oversaw the massacre of 7000 Jews in Lviv, into the White House in 1983.

    “Your struggle is our struggle,” Reagan told the former Nazi collaborator. “Your dream is our dream.”

    When the Justice Department launched a crusade to capture and prosecute Nazi war criminals in 1985, UCCA snapped into action, lobbying Congress to halt the initiative. “The UCCA has also played a leading role in opposing federal investigations of suspected Nazi war criminals since those queries got underway in the late 1970’s,” Bellant wrote. “Some UCCA members have many reasons to worry – reasons which began in the 1930’s.”

    Still an active and influential lobbying force in Washington, the UCCA does not appear to have shed its reverence for Banderist nationalism. In 2009, on the 50th anniversary of Bandera’s death, the group proclaimed him “a symbol of strength and righteousness for his followers” who “continue[s] to inspire Ukrainians today.” A year later, the group honored the 60th anniversary of the death of Roman Shukhevych, the OUN-B commander of the Nachtigall Battalion that slaughtered Jews in Lviv and Belarus, calling him a “hero” who “fought for honor, righteousness…”

    Back in Ukraine in 2010, then-President Viktor Yushchenko awarded Bandera the title of “National Hero of Ukraine,” marking the culmination of his efforts to manufacture an anti-Russian national narrative that sanitized the OUN-B’s fascism. (Yuschenko’s wife, Katherine Chumachenko, was a former Reagan administration official and ex-staffer at the right-wing Heritage Foundation). When the European Parliament condemned Yushchenko’s proclamation as an affront to “European values,” the UCCA-affiliated Ukrainian World Congress reacted with outrage, accusing the EU of “another attempt to rewrite Ukrainian history during WWII.” On its website, the UCCA dismissed historical accounts of Bandera’s collaboration with the Nazis as “Soviet propaganda.”

    Following the demise of Yanukovich this month, the UCCA helped organize rallies in cities across the US in support of the EuroMaidan protests. When several hundred demonstrators marched through downtown Chicago, some waved Ukrainian flags while others proudly flew the red and black banners of the UPA and OUN-B. “USA supports Ukraine!” they chanted.

    Comment by vlad — April 3, 2014 @ 4:12 am

  24. AP, to make it easier for you to assault Max Blumenthal’s reputation and call him “a Nazi and an anti-semite” (as you called Kolesnichenko and the Poles who organized an exhibition on UPA’s crimes against Poles and Jews in Volyn”, here is the link for you:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Blumenthal

    Max Blumenthal (born December 18, 1977) is an American author, journalist, and blogger. Formerly a writer for The Daily Beast and Al Akhbar, he is the author of Republican Gomorrah: Inside the Movement that Shattered the Party (2009).[1][2][3][4] and Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel (2013).
    Blumenthal says that the 2009 book Republican Gomorrah: Inside the Movement That Shattered the Party is inspired by the work of psychologist Erich Fromm, who asserted that “the fear of freedom propels anxiety-ridden people into authoritarian settings.” Blumenthal says that in his view a “culture of personal crisis” has defined the American “radical right”.[27]

    He released the book Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel in 2013.[28] In the preface to the book, Blumenthal wrote that it is “Americans’ tax dollars and political support that are crucial in sustaining the present state of affairs” in Israel and that, in the book, he wanted to show what that money is paying for and to present the facts, using the same journalistic methods used in his previous book, Republican Gomorrah, “as they really are today, in unadorned and unsanitized form, without sentimentality or nostalgia.”[29] An article in The Forward magazine appearing shortly after the book was published, in covering responses to one of the rare critiques of the book which appeared in print, reported that “outside the far-left and anti-Israel blogosphere, ‘Goliath’ has been ignored.”[30]

    Comment by vlad — April 3, 2014 @ 4:19 am

  25. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26868119

    Ukraine’s special police were behind the killings of dozens of anti-government protesters in Kiev in February, a government inquiry says.

    Interior Minister Arsen Avakov told reporters 12 members of the Berkut police had been identified as snipers, and three of them had been arrested.

    He presented what he said was new evidence from the shootings on 18-20 February, when 76 people were killed.

    Months of mass protests led to the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych.

    Continue reading the main story

    Start Quote

    A special squad from the riot Berkut police, wearing yellow armbands, opened fire at the protesters. Much of this fire was targeted”

    Arsen Avakov
    Ukrainian Interior Minister

    More than 100 people are now known to have died in Ukraine since the unrest began in November over Mr Yanukovych’s last-minute rejection of a landmark deal with the European Union in favour with closer Russian ties.

    Ukraine’s new authorities have since signed the political part of the association agreement with the EU.

    Meanwhile, Russia – which backed Mr Yanukovych – last month annexed Crimea in southern Ukraine following a controversial referendum branded illegal by Kiev and the West.

    In other developments on Thursday:

    Russia raised the price of its gas for Ukraine to $485 (£292) per 1,000 cubic metres – the second hike in two days;
    The European Parliament backed a proposal to cut customs duties on imports from Ukraine – a measure that is expected to save Ukrainian firms 487m euros (£404m) per year.
    ‘Uniforms burnt’
    At a news conference in Kiev, Mr Avakov presented the initial findings of an initial investigation into the mass shootings that shocked Ukraine and the world.

    Most of the demonstrators who died were killed on Instytutska street near the main protest camp on Independence Square, widely known as the Maidan.

    Mr Avakov gave details of one particular episode where he said the inquiry had established that eight of those killed were hit by bullets from the same machine-gun.

    He identified Maj Dmytro Sadovnyk as commander of a unit suspected of shooting dead at least 17 protesters.

    “From the side of the the Zhovtnevy Palace, a special squad from the riot Berkut police, wearing yellow armbands, opened fire at the protesters. Much of this fire was targeted. We are carrying out ballistics tests on the weapons,” Mr Avakov said.

    The interior minister also showed a number of slides and photos illustrating where he said police snipers were firing from. He named two buildings on Khreshchatyk and Kostyolna streets, saying other spots were still being investigated.

    And he added that the previous authorities had tried to make the inquiry impossible by burning uniforms, dumping weapons and destroying documents.

    A number of those responsible for the shootings are believed to have fled to Crimea.

    ‘Direct leadership’
    Ukrainian Security Service chief Valentyn Nalyvaychenko said that Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) operatives had been involved in planning operations against the protesters.

    He added that the FSB had sent “tonnes” of explosives and weapons by plane to Ukraine.

    The Ukrainian authorities also said that the killings of the protesters took place “under the direct leadership” of Mr Yanukovych.

    They said arrest warrants had been issued for the ex-president and Oleksandr Yakymenko, Ukraine’s former security service chief.

    Mr Yanukovych – who is now in Russia – has repeatedly denied the allegations.

    In a TV interview on Wednesday, he claimed the shooting in February came from buildings held by protesters.

    Comment by Andrew — April 3, 2014 @ 8:05 am

  26. “Also the French were not at all big fans of Russia at the time”

    Actually, at the time France had an alliance with the Soviet Union, the destruction of which was a major aim of British foreign policy at the time.

    Chamberlain’s cabinet had to threaten total British abandonment of France to pressure Daladier into going along with Munich.

    Comment by PailiP — April 3, 2014 @ 10:20 am

  27. @ Vlad,

    Your source is shockingly ignorant. It states, “In Washington, the OUN-B reconstituted under the banner of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA), an umbrella organization comprised of “complete OUN-B fronts,””

    Nope.

    https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A3%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%97%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%8C%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC%D1%96%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%82_%D0%90%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8

    With such a glaring mistake he successfully loses all of his credibility about Ukrainians.

    Also, the collaboration of the far left and the far right with respect to Ukraine is well known. The western observers of the Crimean referendum were a motley mix of neo-Nazis and neo-Stalinists.

    Comment by AP — April 3, 2014 @ 10:44 am

  28. AP, I don’t have time to analyze whether “OUN-B reconstituted under the banner of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America” or not. It’s totally irrelevant. it is a safe bet that among 100+ statements, the author may have made a couple of mistakes concerning totally unimportant items. In all our arguments, every time I provided a quote from a written document, you researched its author and dismissed it because the author had made 1 factual mistake in his book, or because some Estonian guy called the author “a liar”, or because the author was a professor of history under Kuchma, or because the author was from OUN-M, or because the author was a German liberal, or because the author’s other book was published by a Polish house owned by an anti-semite, or because n organizer of the Volyn exhibition is a member of the Party of Regions, etc,etc etc.

    So, let us concentrate on the IMPORTANT claims in this article. Which of them are untrue?

    Comment by vlad — April 3, 2014 @ 2:59 pm

  29. Mot to mention your recent rejection of a Gallup Poll because you, in your infinite mathematical brilliance, have discovered that the Gallup standard methodology of sampling 1000 people doesn’t give the margin of error of plus-minus 3% with 95% confidence (as any student of introductory probability theory can easily verify for himself) and cannot be trusted.

    You even went further by claiming that Gallup professionals are so retarded that it is possible that when doing their uniform sampling all over Ukraine, all 1000 of their samples came from the city of Kiev and nowhere else.

    You will say the most stupid things in trying to dismiss facts that don’t sit well with you.

    Comment by vlad — April 3, 2014 @ 3:10 pm

  30. http://platfor.ma/magazine/text-sq/53368d67188ae/533b1f2451d13/

    http://platfor.ma/images/doc/5/9/599807c——————-2.jpg

    Comment by vlad — April 3, 2014 @ 4:02 pm

  31. Dear Russian-speakers, what do you think about the comments that great Russian 19th century poets Pushkin and Tytchev wrote about the modern situation in Russia and Ukraine:

    https://scontent-b-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/t1.0-9/10171128_285017494990060_797828570_n.jpg

    Напрасный труд — нет, их не вразумишь.
    Чем либеральней, тем они пошлее.
    Цивилизация — для них фетиш,
    Но недоступна им её идея.

    Как перед ней ни гнитесь, господа,
    Вам не снискать признанья от Европы:
    В её глазах вы будете всегда
    Не слуги просвещенья, а холопы.

    Май 1867

    А.С.Пушкин

    КЛЕВЕТНИКАМ РОССИИ

    О чем шумите вы, народные витии?
    Зачем анафемой грозите вы России?
    Что возмутило вас? волнения Литвы?
    Оставьте: это спор славян между собою,
    Домашний, старый спор, уж взвешенный судьбою,
    Вопрос, которого не разрешите вы.

    Уже давно между собою
    Враждуют эти племена;
    Не раз клонилась под грозою
    То их, то наша сторона.
    Кто устоит в неравном споре:
    Кичливый лях, иль верный росс?
    Славянские ль ручьи сольются в русском море?
    Оно ль иссякнет? вот вопрос.

    Оставьте нас: вы не читали
    Сии кровавые скрижали;
    Вам непонятна, вам чужда
    Сия семейная вражда;
    Для вас безмолвны Кремль и Прага;
    Бессмысленно прельщает вас
    Борьбы отчаянной отвага —
    И ненавидите вы нас…

    За что ж? ответствуйте: за то ли,
    Что на развалинах пылающей Москвы
    Мы не признали наглой воли
    Того, под кем дрожали вы?
    За то ль, что в бездну повалили
    Мы тяготеющий над царствами кумир
    И нашей кровью искупили
    Европы вольность, честь и мир?..

    Вы грозны на словах – попробуйте на деле!
    Иль старый богатырь, покойный на постеле,
    Не в силах завинтить свой измаильский штык?
    Иль русского царя уже бессильно слово?
    Иль нам с Европой спорить ново?
    Иль русский от побед отвык?
    Иль мало нас? Или от Перми до Тавриды,
    От финских хладных скал до пламенной Колхиды,
    От потрясенного Кремля
    До стен недвижного Китая,
    Стальной щетиною сверкая,
    Не встанет русская земля?..
    Так высылайте ж к нам, витии,
    Своих озлобленных сынов:
    Есть место им в полях России,
    Среди нечуждых им гробов.

    1831

    Comment by vlad — April 3, 2014 @ 4:20 pm

  32. @ Vlad,

    Your rude words to me suggest an acknowledgement that you have lost the arguments, again. Anyways:

    “AP, I don’t have time to analyze whether “OUN-B reconstituted under the banner of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America” or not. It’s totally irrelevant. it is a safe bet that among 100+ statements, the author may have made a couple of mistakes concerning totally unimportant items.

    UCCA is the main umbrella organization of all Ukrainian organizations in the diaspora – banks, schools, societies such as the Ukrainian Medical Society, etc. It was founded in 1940, based on an earlier organization from 1920 – long before there was an OUN-B. Moreover, the OUN-B itself did not even exist until August 1940. So how could it, the same year, reconstitute itself in Washington DC? This is not a trivial mistake when someone is writing about the Ukrainian diaspora and Banderists. It’s tells us that the author doesn’t know what he is writing about and is clueless when it comes to choosing his sources. A knowledgeable person wouldn’t make such mistakes. The fact that you, in your desperation, cling to such an ignorant author tells us a lot about the accuracy of your various claims.

    So before I answer more questions about this article, please explain which points in your mind are important?

    At least your source did note that Tiahnybok hosted an Israeli diplomat. How many Nazis do you know, who would do that?

    “Mot to mention your recent rejection of a Gallup Poll because you, in your infinite mathematical brilliance, have discovered that the Gallup standard methodology of sampling 1000 people doesn’t give the margin of error of plus-minus 3% with 95% confidence (as any student of introductory probability theory can easily verify for himself) and cannot be trusted. You even went further by claiming that Gallup professionals are so retarded that it is possible that when doing their uniform sampling all over Ukraine, all 1000 of their samples came from the city of Kiev and nowhere else.”

    Ah yes, you made a funny claim that only 17% of people in Ukraine prefer to use the Ukrainian language based on a Gallup poll.

    Your original link did not include information about where the sample was from within Ukraine. I stated that it could have all been from Kiev, or not – there was no evidence and in the link you provided Gallup did not state their sample was “from all over Ukraine.” You subsequently provided a different link showing that in general Gallup samples are from throughout the country. Well, since Ukraine has 24 oblasts/administrative units this means that Gallup used about 42 people from each oblast. Not an impressive number to draw conclusions about language preference in the oblasts.

    I then provided a link to studies with sample sizes 10,000s of people, using the same methodology as Gallup, which showed results corresponding to reality (about equal preference for Russian and Ukrainian across the country). You ignored these, apparently because Kuchma was president of Ukraine at the time the studies were made, and because you didn’t understand the Ukrainian language and couldn’t figure out how to use googletranslate.

    Is that about right?

    In case statistics are a problem for you, we can look at things in other ways.

    Did you know that the 7 provinces that joined Ukraine in 1939, account for about 20% of Ukraine’s population? And that they are about 95% Ukrainian speaking? So if you and the small Gallup sample are correct, there are basically zero Ukrainian speakers east of the 1939 border. Do you really believe this? I am curious how deep your fantasy is.

    Comment by AP — April 3, 2014 @ 5:46 pm

  33. http://izvestia.ru/news/568677

    Comment by vlad — April 4, 2014 @ 1:03 am

  34. “I disagree that the American reflex has been isolationism.” Charles, I did not mean the ultimate response but rather early reactions. Consider Gallup polls for 1941 (http://ibiblio.org/pha/Gallup/Gallup%201941.htm): I believe they indicated a qualified isolationism, “stay out as long as we can.”

    Days after Germany attacked the USSR, 79% wished the US to stay out of the war. In November, 63% were against Congress passing a resolution “declaring that a state of war exists between the United States and Germany.” On the other hand, in the same November 1941, 68% thought that defeating Germany was more important than keeping out of the war.

    Comment by Alex K. — April 4, 2014 @ 2:15 am

  35. +++Dear Russian-speakers, what do you think about the comments that great Russian 19th century poets Pushkin and Tytchev wrote about the modern situation in Russia and Ukraine +++

    Мы думаем, что даже величайшим поэтам иногда доводилось писать хуйню.

    We think even the greatest of poets sometimes happened to write crap. You forgot Brodsky, btw (“Дорогой Карл XII…”).

    Of course, bringing Russian poetry to this site where the owner and the majority of the readers don’t speak it, is just “хамство”. This Russian word derives from Ham of the Old Testament.

    Comment by LL — April 4, 2014 @ 11:34 am

  36. > Of course, bringing Russian poetry to this site where the owner and the majority of the readers don’t speak it, is just “хамство”.

    Certainly, Craig’s articles on commodity trading should be commented in English. But most Craig’s posts, including this one, is about Russia. Can you imagine a Russian expert on USA who doesn’t know English? Same here. I know that AP knows Russian. Andrew claims that he had lived in Russia for several years. So does “So?”. Craig is an expert on Russia, so he surely knows Russian. So do you. So does MJ, unless the two of you are the same person. So do most other posters to Craig’s blog.

    The only person here who doesn’t know Russian is elmer. But he doesn’t know anything else either (i apologize for being politically incorrect about his handicap), and I certainly have no burning desire for him to read my posts.

    Comment by vlad — April 4, 2014 @ 1:35 pm

  37. Was I wrong in claiming that Yanukovich’s police didn’t use excessive violence to disperse the Maidan demonstration? I just found videos showing how the police violently disperse demonstrators with tear gas and water cannon just a few hours after the demonstration started. Why couldn’t they allow these demonstrations to last for a week or, better, for 3 months, like on Maidan?!

    How barbaric! This could NEVER happen in the West, can it?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04qwhyWdsRE
    Tear Gas, Water Cannon Used To Disperse…

    Comment by vlad — April 4, 2014 @ 3:56 pm

  38. Contrast this with the brutality with the Ysnukovich police assault “peaceful” demonstrators’ bats, clubs and Molotoff cocktails with their faces in January and February 2014:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVPlewtvAnM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cv12rMFMfjE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icI1qnc78Jc

    What a difference between Yanukovich and the USA. In the US, when an angry group attacks a policeman with bats or other weapons, the other policemen are required to shoot and kill everybody involved.

    Comment by vlad — April 4, 2014 @ 4:30 pm

  39. Ah PailiP, ever the in the wrong.

    The French commitment to the Franco Soviet pact (it wasn’t an alliance, if you actually knew anything about it you’d know the difference) was lukewarm at best.

    They never committed to any military action, or even laid out what steps they would take upon activation of the pact.

    British, Italian, and German opposition to the pact was that it violated the spirit of, and severely undermined, the treaty of Lacarno.

    Comment by Andrew — April 4, 2014 @ 11:31 pm

  40. Pushkin, apart from being a talented poet, was also a piece of sh*t. Which is rather a rule for Muscovite “intelligentsia” in general, then as well as now. This is hardly a mystery, simply a natural result of “unnatural selection”: decent human beings are mostly destroyed by Muscovite cannibal totalitarianism long before they are able to achieve anything creatively. All that remains is vlads of all sorts, with few exceptions.

    Comment by Ivan — April 5, 2014 @ 2:09 am

  41. Hey, Ivan, why was Pushkin “a piece of sh*t” more than other great world poets?

    BTW, did your parents give you a Russian name on purpose, in order to make you suffer all your life?

    Comment by vlad — April 5, 2014 @ 1:47 pm

  42. Here’s “Sevastopol Waltz” sung by the great Estonian singer Georg Otts just 2 years after Crimea (except for Sevastopol) were re-administered from RSFSR to USSR by Khrushchev:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGZHDThxGLo

    Comment by vlad — April 6, 2014 @ 12:27 am

  43. In 1956

    Comment by vlad — April 6, 2014 @ 12:27 am

  44. And here is a prophetic song “Sevastopol will remain Russian” by the great Russian bard Aleksandr Moiseevich Gorodnitsky about 5 or 6 years ago:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAgrbxU_e_g

    The guy, who made the video out of it, has good pictures of various Western aggressors – Brits, French, German Nazis, NATO – who stole Sevastopol from Russia over the last 150 years, but Sevastopol always returned.

    Comment by vlad — April 6, 2014 @ 12:33 am

  45. The Royal Norwegian orchestra singing the famous Russia pre-WWI military march “Farewell of the Slavic Woman” on Russian TV last year:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAgrbxU_e_g

    Comment by vlad — April 6, 2014 @ 12:41 am

  46. I meant this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x87nSL58crc

    And here is a modern Russian version:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7avPl6jB5w

    Comment by vlad — April 6, 2014 @ 12:43 am

  47. Here is a song to the memory of the Russian and Ukrainian soldiers who died in the 1980s trying to defeat the Taliban extremists, supplied and trained by Pakistan and the CIA, and to liberate Afghanistan from Islamic extremists and Bin Laden, to no avail:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfHSiuTyLhw
    Alexander Rosenbaum

    Comment by vlad — April 6, 2014 @ 1:17 am

  48. Who knew that after the joint work in Afghanistan in hte 1980s and in Kosovo in 1999, in the 2000s these best friends – Taliban, Bin Laden, islamic terrorists, KLA and the US government – would become bitter enemies, only to re-unite once again in the 2010s in modern Syria in the efforts to turn Syria into an Islamic terrorist haven. I guess islamic terrorism sponsors will always remain such until the taxpayers and voters finally say: “No more! No more Brzezinskis! No more Albrights! No more McCains and other Cains! No more Tyahnyboks! No more support for terrorists and mass murderers!”

    Comment by vlad — April 6, 2014 @ 1:29 am

  49. Western agressors trying to steal Crimea from Russia?

    Russia stole Crimea from the Tatars and then committed genocide on them, as usual for Russia.

    Where is your concern for the Tatar population who have been there for far far longer than the Russian invaders?

    Comment by Andrew — April 6, 2014 @ 3:22 am

  50. > Kerry & Lavrov Negotiate Ukraine’s Surrender in Paris: Were All the Rooms in Munich Booked?

    Munich? Isn’t that the place where the noble leaders of future NATO countries of UK and France reneged on France’s commitment to help USSR defend Czechoslovakia, and magnanimously gave their future NATO ally Czechoslovakia as a present to their best friends and future NATO allies: noble Germany, Poland and Hungary, and then pretended to be outraged when USSR was forced to negotiate with Germany as well?

    Comment by vladislav — April 7, 2014 @ 2:48 am

  51. Maidan in Donetsk:

    https://scontent-a-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/t1.0-9/10155351_609269239165290_959481962075809551_n.jpg

    Notice the stunning difference between the friendship between demonstrators and local police in Donetsk, and the hostility with which Kiev’s Maidan treated the police.

    Comment by vladislav — April 7, 2014 @ 1:46 pm

  52. Especially for Vlad:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/09/world/europe/ukraines-jews-dismiss-claims-of-anti-semitism.html?_r=0

    Comment by AP — April 8, 2014 @ 5:25 pm

  53. AP, MJ is correct for once: the fate of Jews is NOT an issue in modern Ukraine. First of all, there are very few left: more than a million perished in the Holocaust at the hands of Germans and OUN members. Most of the remaining have emigrated to Israel, Russia and USA. Even if Svoboda and Right Sector come to power, the remaining Jews will emigrate long before any sanctions against them are implemented. The worst that can happen is that the assets of Ukrainian oligarchs will be expropriated, and not of ALL Jewish oligarchs, but only those of the pro-Yanukovich oligarchs, and I don’t consider the fate of oligarchs’ riches to be of much concern.

    What is of utter important is the fate of so-called “Moskals” of all eccentricities, but primarily of Russian and Ukrainian ethnicity. People who hate Jews are xenophobes, and once a xenophobe is always a xenophobe. Let me post Youtube videos of numerous demonstrations in Ukraine demanding the slaughter of “Moskals”:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCCH1BTLFro
    Приезд Фарион в Одессу Москалей – на ножи!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3Mr_ZrrqEQ
    Москалей на ножи, Правый Сектор идет по городу.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4WMU0rQqkc
    Марш бандеровцев УПА: москалей на ножи!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mS0soKFrhqA
    Киев. 27.03.2014.Правосеки перед штурмом Верховной Рады.”Москалей на ножи”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOVnsd6e4_Y
    01/01/2013 Хватит бухать пора воевать! Москалей на ножи!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbH_kj21rVk
    25/03/14 Правый сектор Россия, жди! Москалей на ножи!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX_ja9OezuE
    14.3.2013 №10 Москалей на ножи!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGIBaCWiN50
    Марш УПА – москалей на ножи

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lKa6AXGtIQ
    МОСКАЛЕЙ НА НОЖИ! (правый сектор)

    http://www.eg.ru/upimg/photo/170941.jpg

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ia47r_CEZJc
    Москаляку на гиляку!

    ” Москалей на ножи!” means “Slaughter Moskals with knives!”

    ” Москаляку на гиляку!” means “Cut Moskals’ heads off!”

    Worse than that is that the children in West Ukraine are indoctrinated into believing that the genocide against “Moskals” is a good thing:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTDHVk4TBzQ
    Школьники в Украинской школе кричат антироссийские лозун

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrJC6rU9lG0
    Школьная линейка в украинской школе. Москаляку на гилляку.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbAVIsF2UuA
    Школьная линейка Дрогобича. Школьники скандируют Москалей на ножи!

    This view is gaining momentum in Ukraine. Even a “moderate democrat” like Yulia Tymoshenko privately wishes a “Moskal” genocide:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEFCmJ-VGhA

    Timoshenko: We need to take arms and kill these damned katsaps [Russians] together with their leader. I do regret I had no possibility to be there and it wasn’t not I who had headed these events. They would have gotten dick instead of Crimea. I would found the way how to kill these a$$holes… and I hope I use all my contacts, I will raise the whole world as soon as I have a chance that not even a burnt ground will remain of Russia.

    Shufrich: But what to do with other 8 millions of ethnic Russians on Ukraine’s territory? They’re pariahs now…

    Timoshenko: Damn, they should be killed with nuclear weapons.

    Comment by vladislav — April 9, 2014 @ 12:56 am

  54. “eccentricities” should read “ethnicities”. :-)

    Comment by vladislav — April 9, 2014 @ 1:00 am

  55. ” Москаляку на гиляку!” means “Cut Moskals’ heads off!” – this is actually a well-known feature of Russian propaganda: they are so lazy and stupid they never bother to learn anything about what they are lying about to be able to avoid the most obvious giveaways.

    I remember when fascist Russia invaded Georgia, they showed some artillery shells on Russian TV as proof that Ukraine was supplying Georgia with weapons (which was supposed to be somehow illegal in the Muscovite propaganda narrative). The only slight problem was, they showed the shells close enough that you could clearly read the inscriptions in Serbian.

    Comment by Ivan — April 9, 2014 @ 7:29 am

  56. Ivan, I understand each individual word in your post, but I fail to see meanings of your sentences. How are these ”Москаляку на гиляку!” Ukrainian demonstrations “Russian propaganda”:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ia47r_CEZJc
    Москаляку на гиляку!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrJC6rU9lG0
    Школьная линейка в украинской школе. Москаляку на гилляку.

    Comment by vladislav — April 9, 2014 @ 12:38 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress