by M.Khazin
translation by “G’ of М.Хазин, “Может ли быть мир на Украине?”
http://worldcrisis.ru/crisis/1646580
The devaluation of the Ruble and the Yevtushenkov affair have so saturated our mass media that it would seem desirable to stand aside and address a more substantial theme. Namely; under what conditions can the Ukraine know peace? Not just any ‘peace’ but a peace without wholesale disintegration of the country into petty fiefdoms, without a bloodstained dictatorship, without ethnic cleansing and without genocide. In order to answer this question, it is necessary, above all, to look at Kiev and Donetsk.
They should be part of one state. However the 10s of thousands killed and the open exhortations to genocide which have been issued by the dominant political forces in Kiev (for example: the phrase ‘Russians, clear off back to Moscovy’, which is directed at people who are not only currently inhabiting Lugansk and Donetsk but who have lived there for centuries, could be considered, formally from the point of view of international legal norms to fit the definition of genocide and, without doubt, that of ethnic cleansing) render such ‘cohabitation’ within the framework of a usual state simply impossible. The people of Donetsk and Lugansk (we include the Odessa massacre, even though it differs, in part from the others ) will never relinquish their right to justice against those who are guilty of the massacre of civilians and, similarly, the Kievan nationalists are unlikely to stop uttering phrases of the sort: ‘ We’ve barbecued that [Colorado Beetle] bitch.’ or other such endearments.
In theory the only way that Kiev can go back to normal would be in the context of sustained economic growth. In that case it might be possible to brush the nationalist slogans back under the carpet and for everyone to benefit from the resultant financial in-flows, but here Kiev has fallen into a trap of its own making. It is a simple fact that economic growth is only possible in collaboration with Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union. There is simply no other option. There is not even any real perspective for the development of agriculture; one would just need look at the example of Bulgaria, where the climate is noticeably more clement than that in Ukraine. Ukraine finds it impossible to compete with Turkey. Once the European Union association agreement comes into force there will be no means of regulating the influx of Turkish agri-business and the only profitable way to engage in agriculture will be in a vegetable garden. It is sufficient to look at the example set in that neighbouring former Soviet state, Moldova.
Insofar as Kiev has adopted a radically anti-Russian model, the chances of growth in that country are precisely zero. The European Union has no money and judging by the way that the crisis is developing the prognosis is not positive, and even if we were to look, more optimistically, into the medium term at the global economic situation, the European Union is most likely to help out the Eastern European Countries and the Baltic States before it bails out Ukraine. Nothing personal, just business.
And this means that Kievan Nationalism is going nowhere. It has no choice as it will be impossible for it to maintain its grip on power otherwise. Moreover it has achieved some success insofar as the United States has enacted sanctions against Russia and coerced its allies in Europe and the wider world to do likewise. There is only one problem: For how long will they be willing to prosecute these sanctions for the sake of Ukraine? Kiev’s issues will continue to mount, insofar as the only way that it can deal with the growth of democratic sentiment in the South East (it is clear that the struggle is for freedom and democracy, regardless of how discordant that sounds from the point of view of the contemporary Western mass media) is by the use of military force. It is far from certain that this particular problem can be resolved by military force.
In summary we can say that, judging by the development of negative economic trends, the intensity of internal confrontation in Kiev will constantly grow. In turn those wishing to live under their guardianship will become fewer and fewer. The cohesion of the Ukrainian state will melt like snow in the heat of the summer sun. As that happens the state will become more and more aggressive So we expect to see a contradiction in answer to the question that we posed. Is it possible to establish peace in the Ukraine?
I intentionally have not referred in general to Ukrainian nationalists, rather specifically to Kievan Nationalists. The fact is that Galician Nationalists and Kievan Nationalists are not the same. The latter always had significant sources of income (be it the budget of the USSR, Ukraine etc.), however the former have been forced to be much more pragmatic. Furthermore they have been unable to understand that they cannot hold Kiev. This is because any government in Kiev, in correspondence to their stability, will in the first instance, fall not upon the Russians in the Donbass, but rather upon the genuine committed nationalists. Today this is what Poroshenko is doing. This was clear earlier and I wrote about this earlier in the year.
Rather than being an idea (which moreover is distinctly un-appealing to the EU), Nationalism for Kiev is an instrument. There is no requirement for committed nationalists. The requirement is for cynics, who are happy to articulate nationalists’ slogans in order to gain control over the budgetary and gas revenue flows. Thus, regarding the situation in recent months, committed nationalists(which for our purposes we shall name ‘Right Sector’) have come to look more and more seriously at breaking away from Kiev. Moreover, Kiev earlier distributed budgetary money to them (received from Donbass and other regions) and now there is no more budgetary money to distribute.
However Galicia by itself cannot breakaway from Kiev. Kiev, for whom the slogan (‘for the unity of the Ukraine’) has become totemic, will never agree to it. This means that, as well as the rebels in the Donbass, there is also appearing a new force, which is also interested in the collapse of the country. In this way, from the above, we can formulate the picture below of the future Ukraine.
Should the Rebels from the South-East reach an agreement with the Galician nationalists, then they will take power in Kiev. In that case, the insurgents, proponents of the former Soviet Union and the slogan ‘friendship of the Peoples’ will, through the creation of a multi-ethnic ethnic state, put an end to nationalism and re-establish peace in the Ukraine. Galicia, as it were, in gratitude for its assistance, would receive either independence, probably as part of a confederation or quite possibly full independence as a separate state. It is clearly difficult to imagine a state where in some schools they teach that Bandera is a fascist criminal and in others – that he is a hero. But that remaining part of the Ukraine will be a peaceful, unified state, entering, one would imagine the European Economic Area.
Should agreement not be reached and the insurgents not achieve victory (either by circumstance or by result of foreign intervention), then the intensifying confrontation in Kiev will inescapably lead to the break-up of the country into petty fiefdoms with a correspondingly low quality of life and norms of governance. At present we enumerate 5 of these; Novorossiya, Hetmanshina (Cossak, with Kiev as its capital), New Khazaria (under the control of the oligarch Kolomoiski) and Galicia. We also consider one more statelet, Transcarpathia which is likely to be dissected and integrated into neighbouring countries.
But nobody has said that the process of disintegration will stop there. Anyone who doubts it should read Bulgakov. The mentality of the people in the Ukraine has not significantly changed since then. It is difficult to even conceive how a normal man can live in these conditions.
If we believe that the best outcome is a united (that is relatively united, without either the Crimea or Galicia) Ukraine, a Ukraine which is peaceful and prosperous, it is essential that the insurgents take control of Kiev. Until this happens, the war will continue. Unfortunately, there is simply no way of stopping the war and preserving Ukraine until Kiev falls to the insurgents.
Y, the Lockerbie travesty was exemplary of the Real Evil Empire’s wickedness and the total moral corruption of the Western MSM. It was known pretty quickly that the plane had been blown up by a bomb secreted on the luggage of a drug mule, who was knowingly or unwittingly being allowed to proceed by the US DEA, hence the non-detection of the device. It had been placed on board by the PFLP resistance group, working out of Syria, at the behest of Iran in order to be revenged on the USA for the deliberate shooting down of the Iranian airbus by the USS Vincennes (about which atrocity the USA lied through its teeth).
The true story was known and published in Western MSM sewers for 18 months, until Syrian and Iranian co-operation was required in the destruction of Iraq after Saddam had fallen into the Kuwait trap. Then everything changed overnight and Libya was framed with planted evidence, faked forensics and a MSM lie campaign of exemplary filthiness.
The sham trial of two conspirators was a disgrace to Scottish justice with US State Department thugs controlling the court-room, and only one defendant, Megrahi, of two alleged ‘conspirators’, convicted. Later he was released to thwart an investigation by Scottish police, when dying, but the vermin of the Western MSM weren’t finished. After Libya was destroyed, tens of thousands slaughtered and the country handed over to jihadist butchers, one or two of the fouler MSM swamps alleged that Scottish police were going to visit Libya to seek information concerning who ordered Megrahi to complete his non-existent mission. These lies, of course, amounted to nothing, but were good for a few days smearing.
@Rasmus
regarding the writing of Brandon Smith:
“RT is relentless in its coverage of corruption within Western governments, but rarely if ever reports anything negative on the Russian establishment.”
“Third, because RT mimics our independent media so well, it appeals greatly to a large percentage of liberty movement activists, who tend to forget or are simply unaware that Russia is as much a part of the problem as our own government. There are many liberty proponents who will angrily defend Russia and RT without question simply because RT “speaks their language”, so Russia must be on their side.”
I think Smith is incorrect. The liberty movement appreciates RT reporting because many of their stories are not reported in the US. American readers are interested in what is going on in the US and US reporting is so clearly deficient. I don’t think they care if RT reports on Russian corruption or not. The Western media are obsessed with such reporting. They can read that at home.
Anonymous said… at 08:31
“I don’t think they care if RT reports on Russian corruption or not. The Western media are obsessed with such reporting. They can read that at home.”
Absolutely. RT also gives “the other side” of western reports on “Russian corruption.” We can look at both sides and make up our own minds.
However, I don’t accept Brandon Smith’s label of “liberty movement activists.” There are people on all sides who are sadly in their own echo chambers.
http://www.alt-market.com/articles/2337-syria-neo-cons-and-the-attempted-infiltration-of-the-liberty-movement
To the Anons discussing Brandon Smith — I think you all make fair points. RT is an international news channel presenting world news ‘from a Russian perspective’. Although it originates in Russia Russia’s domestic issues and problems were never its primary concern. You could argue the channel should cover Russian corruption more often and deal with the issues, but I’ve often found RT’s Documentary channel to be brutally honest about ordinary problems — rural poverty, inadequate help for the disabled and orphans, and the like. What they don’t cover of course in too much depth is the Kremlin infighting, corruption at the federal level, or the alleged 5th Columnists like Surkov.
I may slightly disagree with Brandon Smith regarding RT, but his primary warning isn’t about the channel but the globalist sock puppets’ increasing propaganda effort to ‘link’ patriots across Europe and even here in the US somehow with Putin. Even if the ‘evidence’ for such links is pure fabrication or individuals merely admiring Putin as a bold leader who stands up to the NWO — that is considered to be ‘collusion’ enough. I have even warned people on Liberty movement websites like Western Rifle Shooters that owning a box of Tula works .223 might be enough ‘proof’ in the future that one is a neo-Confederate insurrectionist backed secretly by the SVR/GRU to restore the Old Confederacy by overthrowing D.C. Pure nonsense — if for no other reason than many people in the Liberty movement are veterans of recent Mideast wars and the Cold War who have long been obsessed with ‘Red Dawn’ ideas about secret Russian or Chinese troops being deployed in the Continental US and Alaska.
The idea that militia movement types in the US would welcome, much less cooperate with, ISIS or Russian spetsnaz/spooks is laughable. But this is the crap that has been peddled by @StopAgitprop (aka @ReginaldQuill) @TSnowbird5000, J.R. Nyquist, and to a lesser extent Cliff Kincaid who is trying to nag Pat Buchanan back onto the globalist ‘Right’ plantation without success. Kincaid also trolls the Drudge Report and accuses Drudge and Sen. Rand Paul with other libertarians of betraying US national security, celebrating the Russian-controlled traitor Ed Snowden, and spreading alarmism about DHS and police militarization. Naturally, big fat Cliff never discusses how he can reconcile his theory that Obama is a secret crypto-Muslim Marxist Manchurian candidate with the notion that the NSA, DHS and FBI would never obey Obama bin Laden’s nefarious orders. Apparently Cliff like much of the gullible leftover viscera of the ‘Reagan coalition’ assumes anybody inside the US government especially in ‘the intelligence community’ is a super-patriot above greed or betrayal of their Oath to uphold the Constitution.
I agree with some parts of the authors analysis.In that the best way to end this is with an NAF victory.I just don’t agree with his method to achieve it.A deal with the neo-nazis would never work.If accurate, what some have said about the strength of the NAF and the Ukie military is correct (30,000 vs 45-60,000) that is a plus for our side.If we use this false cease-fire period to enlarge our forces we don’t need a deal.We will be strong enough to defeat the junta without it.The mistake we have made,and continue to make,is not creating a unified government for Novorossii yet.And if the ultimate goal is to unset the junta,a government for Ukraine as well.A government in exile ,so to speak.One that we can say is the true legitimate Ukrainian government.To give Ukrainians that oppose the junta a government to rally around. Instead of being forced to accept the junta.We have right now,at this moment the perfect circumstances to do that.With the Rada elections coming up.The junta is banning parties they don’t like.And forbidding many previous Rada members to run in he election.They are firing almost a million people from the previous regime.That leaves those people.Many of which ,have literally been thrown in trash cans.And their voters,out of options and mad.If Novorossii agents meet with many of them.They might come over to our side.That would give us viable known politicians to enlist for an alternate Ukrainian government.By forming a rival to the junta.That can lead to other countries being unsure about the legality of the junta.And gives us supporters in occupied Ukrainian territory.I don’t understand why our side hasn’t seen that already and acted on it.