Posted on 02/21/2014 7:58:31 AM PST by Freelance Warrior
Richard Engel of NBC, reporting from Maidan Square in Kiev, described what he witnessed as the Feb. 19 truce collapsed.
Police began to back away from their positions in the square, said Engel. And the protesters attacked. Gunfire was exchanged and the death toll, believed to be in the dozens, is not known.
In short, the reality in Kiev is more complex than the black-and-white cartoon of Vladimir Putin vs. the freedom fighters drawn by our resident Russophobic elite. Perspective is in order.
First, though portrayed as a tyrannical thug, Viktor Yanukovych won the presidency of Ukraine in 2010 in what international observers called a free and fair election. He may not be Marcus Aurelius, but his remains the legitimate government.
Second, high among the reasons Yanukovych chose Russia’s offer to join its custom union over the EU is that Putin put a better deal on the table.
Moscow put up $15 billion in loans and cut-rate oil and gas. The EU offered some piddling loans and credits, plus a demand for reforms in the Ukrainian economy monitored by the IMF, but no commitment to full membership in the EU.
As for the “protesters” who came to Maidan Square in November, not all came simply to protest. Many set up tents and shacks, threw up barricades, seized government buildings, burned the headquarters of the ruling party, battled police and demanded the overthrow of the regime.
How many Western countries would permit a planned putsch in their capital city? Still, after weeks of protest, Yanukovych offered to negotiate.
He fired his prime minister and tendered the post to the leader of the opposition Arseniy Yatsenyuk. He offered to make Vitali Klitschko, the ex-heavyweight champion and the head of another opposition party, the deputy prime minister. His offer was rejected.
Yanukovych then had parliament repeal the tough laws against protests he had had enacted and delivered a full amnesty to those arrested during the months of occupation. In effect, Yanukovych offered peace and a coalition government with his opponents until new presidential elections new year.
Does that sound like an unyielding tyrant?
Why was this unacceptable? Because the protesters want Yanukovych out, new elections now, and Ukraine reoriented toward Europe.
While the opposition has every right to urge this course, is not next year’s presidential election the place to decide the future of the country? What kind of democracy is it where a democratically elected president can be forced out of office by mobs?
When Muhammed Morsi, the elected president of Egypt, was ousted in a military coup last summer, backed by huge crowds in Tahrir Square, John Kerry said the army was “restoring democracy.”
Is this the new American concept of democracy, that when an elected government makes a major decision many dislike, the people should take to the streets and shut down the capital until the president reverses course or resigns?
President Obama is telling the Yanukovych government to respect the protesters. No violence. But how would Obama react if thousands of Tea Party members established an encampment on the Mall, burned down the DNC, occupied the Capitol and demanded he either repeal Obamacare or resign?
Would Barack Obama negotiate?
Russia has accused us of meddling in Ukraine’s internal affairs.
And when we see the State Department’s Victoria Nuland in Maidan Square egging on the protesters, and hear tape of Nuland discussing with the U.S. ambassador whom we want in the next Ukrainian government, do not the Russians have a point?
Under George W. Bush, our National Endowment for Democracy helped to engineer color-coded revolutions in Serbia, Ukraine, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan, but it failed in Belarus. We have a long track record of meddling.
And was it not interference in the internal affairs of Ukraine for John McCain to fly to Kiev, go down to Maidan Square, and do his best imitation of Mario Savio in Sproul Plaza?
If the Cold War is over, why are we playing these Cold War games?
Imagine where America would be today had the neocons gotten their way and brought Georgia and Ukraine into NATO.
We would have been eyeball-to-eyeball with Russia in the South Ossetian war of 2008, and eyeball-to-eyeball today over Kiev. Yet, in neither country is there any vital U.S. interest worth risking war with Russia.
What is coming in Ukraine, however, is likely to be far worse than what we have seen up to now. For this political crisis has deepened the divide between a western Ukraine that looks to Europe, and an east whose historic, linguistic, cultural and ethnic bonds are with Mother Russia.
With reports of police and soldiers in western Ukraine defecting from the government to join the rebellion, Ukraine could be a country sliding into civil war. If so, the spillover effects could be ominous.
But, to be candid, what happens in Ukraine has always been more critical to Moscow than it has ever been to us.
As Barack Obama said of Syria, this is “somebody else’s civil war.”
It interests me that a man named Patrick Buchanan apparently does not see the parallels between England-Ireland and Russia-Ukraine. Foreign power imposes control by imperial conquest, exploits natural resources, impoverishes and decimates indigenous population through terror-famine and massive emigration, settles people of their different culture and religion in positions of power, better jobs, etc., and wonders why the locals are “disloyal” after all they’ve done for them. Over time the imports and their descendants think they are natives, but memories are long. Force is required to maintain control. Yes it is a complex situation, with a lot more in play than a protest against corruption.
I think its interesting that everyone is ignoring the fact that many of the protesters are from the bandaras nazi party. These are the same folks who manned a SS division in WW2, which operated in Ukraine. With the traumas of WW2, you think the Russian people let alone Putin will stand for a nazi themed goverment next door? Just on GP this will get Putin 100% backing from all russians.
>>>To quote the Kyiv Post: “Ukraine is in the midst of a financial as well as a political crisis, one that is essentially caused by embezzlement from the Ukrainian state by its rulers to the tune of $8 billion to $10 billion a year.”. The level of corruption is mind-blowing.<<<
Was any previous Ukrainian administration any different?
>>>People of Ukraine rebelled against institutionalized corruption becoming norm just like in neighboring Russia.<<<
You might be kidding here. Russian corruption is nowhere near Ukrainian level. Just visit one country and another. In Russia they have a vibrant middle class, while in the Ukraine there are a few rich officials and their cronies and the rest of the country are ox and cart. If you are lazy to visit, at least compare average incomes or GDP per capita figures.
You are right: striking resemblance, with some cultural adjustments/corrections. Yet it is not anti-Russian revolt, it’s rather anti-Sovok (common term for die-hard admirers of Soviet Union). Russians en masse seem genetically predisposed to feudal governance, Ukrainians gravitate to more modern society.
Stop embarrassing yourself repeating Russian propaganda. “all russians” you claim to represent are not that stupid.
What income has to do with corruption, except the source? Try to think before you type. The Ukrainian “elite” ARE mostly Russian mobsters, building their wealth on the backs of honest Ukrainians.
Are you including a Maidan Queen Timoshenko into your ‘Russian mobster’ crowd?
Timoshenko? Sure.
Have you been to Russia or Ukraine and talked to people about WW2 or even watched the victory day parades? The war with the nazis affected everyone in the country personally. And yes the Bandaristas are a nazi based political group. Their flag is a modified swastika. Right after the soviet breakup the bandaristas became public again to include military style training camps. I’m not a great fan of Russia, {ie Georgia} but the opposition in this case is tainted even worse.
If so, I can’t understand your affiliations there. Are you expecting replacing Yanukovitz with another ‘Russian mobster’ as a result of these riots?
LOL, if Pat reads FR, he probably cries like a baby.
Unfortunately, yes - that is what I expect. There will be many cycles in this process, dinosaurs eventually will die out, but until then - it’s going to be a tug-o-war.
Enjoy yourself, I won’t interrupt. You seem to be so convinced in all this nazi nonsense, that there is no point in arguing with you.
Even before the protests started, the opinion polls had him behind Klitchko or Yatsenuyk in head to head elections by 15-10 points. Now he's trailing the far-right Tyahnybok. The reason is that his eastern and southern base has been very disappointed by his policies. They would've dumped him long ago if not for the rigid communist-era party structure which doesn't allow an alternative.
The chance that Yanukovych would've allowed a fair election is zero point zero, like the 2012 parliamentary election.
I have not read anything about this. Interesting.
As I said earlier I wouldn’t miss Yanukovitz.
You can vote in either Klitchko or Mike Tyson or anyone else you wish.
It's a battle of bottom feeders.
Transparency International,
in 2010 has Ukraine at 134th place; Russia at 154th
in 2013, Ukraine is 144th, Russia at 127
it doesn't mean anything, but when did your boy Yanek get elected?
>>Transparency International, in 2010 has Ukraine at 134th place; Russia at 154th in 2013, Ukraine is 144th, Russia at 127<<
These numbers with these respective NGOs makes less sense than basic astrology.
There are at least a dozen nations in first hundred, factually more corrupt than Ukraine and Russia combined.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.