[Peace-discuss] The Guardian - It's not Russia that's pushed Ukraine to the brink of war

[David Johnson]

The Guardian 

It's not Russia that's pushed Ukraine to the brink of war 

 

 <https://www.theguardian.com/profile/seumasmilne> Seumas Milne 

The attempt to lever Kiev into the western camp by ousting an elected leader
made conflict certain. It could be a threat to us all 

Wed 30 Apr 2014 

 
<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/30/russia-ukraine-war-ki
ev-conflict#comments> 

'The reality is that after two decades of Nato expansion, this crisis was
triggered by the west's attempt to pull Ukraine decisively into its orbit .
' Illustration: Matt Kenyon 

The threat of war in Ukraine is growing. As the unelected government in Kiev
declares itself unable to control the rebellion in the country's east, John
Kerry
<https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/30/us-intercepts-moscow-calls-to
-spies-kerry-leaked-remarks-russia> brands Russia a rogue state. The US and
the European Union step up sanctions against the Kremlin, accusing it of
destabilising Ukraine. The White House is reported to be set on
<http://www.thenation.com/article/179579/cold-war-against-russia-without-deb
ate> a new cold war policy with the aim of turning Russia into a "pariah
state".

That might be more explicable if what is going on in eastern
<https://www.theguardian.com/world/ukraine> Ukraine now were not the mirror
image of what took place in Kiev a couple of months ago. Then, it was armed
protesters in Maidan Square seizing government buildings and demanding a
change of government and constitution. US and European leaders championed
the "masked militants" and denounced the elected government for its
crackdown, just as they now back the unelected government's use of force
against rebels occupying police stations and town halls in cities such as
Slavyansk and Donetsk.

"America is with you,"
<https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/15/john-mccain-ukraine-protests-
support-just-cause> Senator John McCain told demonstrators then, standing
shoulder to shoulder with the leader of
<http://www.channel4.com/news/ukraine-mccain-far-right-svoboda-anti-semitic-
protests> the far-right Svoboda party as the US ambassador haggled with the
state department over who would make up the new Ukrainian government.

When the Ukrainian president was replaced by a US-selected administration,
in an
<http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/david-morrison/ukraine-willliam-hague_b_493
3177.html> entirely unconstitutional takeover, politicians such as William
Hague
<http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmhansrd/cm140304/debtext
/140304-0001.htm> brazenly misled parliament about the legality of what had
taken place: the imposition of a pro-western government on Russia's most
neuralgic and politically divided neighbour.

Putin bit back, taking a leaf out of the US street-protest playbook - even
though, as in Kiev, the protests that spread from Crimea to eastern Ukraine
evidently have mass support. But what had been a glorious cry for freedom in
Kiev became infiltration and insatiable aggression in Sevastopol and
Luhansk.

After Crimeans voted overwhelmingly to join Russia, the bulk of the western
media abandoned any hint of even-handed coverage. So Putin is now routinely
compared to Hitler, while the
<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/29/ukraine-fascists-olig
archs-eu-nato-expansion> role of the fascistic right on the streets and
<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/05/clash-crimea-western-
expansion-ukraine-fascists> in the new Ukrainian regime has been airbrushed
out of most reporting as Putinist propaganda.

So you don't hear much about the Ukrainian government's
<http://www.channel4.com/news/svoboda-ministers-ukraine-new-government-far-r
ight> veneration of wartime Nazi collaborators and pogromists, or the arson
attacks on the homes and offices of elected communist leaders, or the
integration of
<https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/23/ukrainian-far-right-groups-vi
olence-kiev-pravy-sektor> the extreme Right Sector into the national guard,
while the
<http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/summary.do?id=1239823&t=e&l=en>
anti-semitism and white supremacism of the government's ultra-nationalists
is assiduously played down, and false identifications of Russian special
forces are relayed as fact.

The reality is that, after two decades of eastward Nato expansion, this
crisis was triggered by the west's attempt to pull Ukraine decisively into
its orbit and defence structure, via an explicitly anti-Moscow EU
association agreement. Its rejection led to the Maidan protests and the
installation of an anti-Russian administration - rejected by half the
country - that went on to sign the EU and International Monetary Fund
agreements regardless.

No Russian government could have acquiesced in such a threat from territory
that was at the heart of both  <https://www.theguardian.com/world/russia>
Russia and the Soviet Union. Putin's absorption of Crimea and support for
the rebellion in eastern Ukraine is clearly defensive, and the red line now
drawn: the east of Ukraine, at least, is not going to be swallowed up by
Nato or the EU.

But the dangers are also multiplying. Ukraine has shown itself to be barely
a functioning state: the former government was unable to clear Maidan, and
the western-backed regime is "helpless" against the protests in the
Soviet-nostalgic industrial east. For all the talk about the paramilitary
"green men" (who turn out to be overwhelmingly Ukrainian), the rebellion
also has strong social and democratic demands: who would argue against a
referendum on autonomy and elected governors?

Meanwhile, the US and its European allies impose sanctions and dictate terms
to Russia and its proteges in Kiev, encouraging the military crackdown on
protesters after visits from Joe Biden and the CIA director, John Brennan.
But by what right is the US involved at all, incorporating under its
strategic umbrella a state that has never been a member of Nato, and whose
last elected government came to power on a platform of explicit neutrality?
It has none, of course - which is why the Ukraine crisis is seen in such a
different light across most of the world. There may be few global takers for
Putin's oligarchic conservatism and nationalism, but Russia's counterweight
to US imperial expansion is welcomed, from China to Brazil.

In fact, one outcome of the crisis is likely to be a closer alliance between
China and Russia, as the US continues its anti-Chinese "pivot" to Asia. And
despite growing violence, the cost in lives of Russia's arms-length
involvement in Ukraine has so far been minimal compared with any significant
western intervention you care to think of for decades.

The risk of civil war is nevertheless growing, and with it the chances of
outside powers being drawn into the conflict. Barack Obama has already sent
token forces to eastern  <https://www.theguardian.com/world/europe-news>
Europe and is under pressure, both from Republicans and Nato hawks such as
Poland, to send many more. Both US and British troops are due to take part
in Nato military exercises in Ukraine this summer.

The US and EU have already overplayed their hand in Ukraine. Neither Russia
nor the western powers may want to intervene directly, and the Ukrainian
prime minister's conjuring up of a
<https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/25/russia-third-world-war-ukrain
e> third world war presumably isn't authorised by his Washington sponsors.
But a century after 1914, the risk of unintended consequences should be
obvious enough - as the threat of a return of big-power conflict grows.
Pressure for a negotiated end to the crisis is essential.

Twitter  <http://twitter.com/SeumasMilne> @SeumasMilne

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20191125/6c7cfac7/attachment-0001.htm>