Contents
1. Starting a Revolution With Fascists Bulldogs
2. U.S. Diplomat Victoria Nuland’s Role
3. CFR’s Usual Government Toppling Routine
4. An Agenda of Globalization Through Petrodollars
There seems to be a problem with US and UK journalists actually getting to the root of the Ukraine crisis without ignoring glaringly obvious facts. Mainstream media calling any mention of Ukrainian fascists “Russian propaganda” is actually western imperialist propaganda in disguise. Even CNN refers to the presence of fascists as a “debate from the beginning” despite the fact that there has never been a debate — it takes merely a quick Google search to see that neo-Nazis have been reported taking control of the opposition from the beginning of the violence and that the U.S. helped put them there with NGO money and a blind eye from our Ukraine ambassadors Victoria Nuland and Geoffery Pyatt. The reality of the Ukraine crisis is in plain sight if you look past the distractions of riots, snipers, fires, and coups to a timeline of the facts.
For example, as I write this now, President Obama is in the middle of hours-long phone calls with Putin over Russia’s stranglehold on Crimea (a southern province of Ukraine often strategically used to close in on the country by Russia and subsequently holding a high Russian population) in an attempt to keep the Ukrainian revolution moving forward. What seems to be lost in mainstream dialogue is why Obama cares and how Ukraine may have been able to handle the revolution itself in a more peaceful way, but would never have been able to defeat Russian forces when they inevitably invaded if the revolution took a violent turn the way it has.
In order to have a revolution, Ukraine would need outside help and a solid game plan, and that is where the United States struts in. With its long history of meddling in foreign affairs for it’s globalization agenda under the guise of “spreading democracy”, we’ve all but perfected the art of westernizing an entire country through NGO programs and dependence on the petrodollar.
Starting a Revolution With Fascists Bulldogs
If we break it down into very simple terms, a revolution needs a new government to suit the people. To have a revolution, you need to remove your government from office. To remove stubborn leaders from office who are backed with any sort of military power, you need to do it by force but, in order to pull this off, you need to convince supporters of the revolution to become violent if necessary. And in order to do that, you need someone who advocates violence as a means to an end in their political platform to lead dissenters into battle. This is where fascists come into play under the disguise of a legitimate political party in Ukraine.
Svoboda is the Ukrainian “Freedom Party”, a right-wing, nationalist political party hell-bent on parting from Russia and staying that way. Svoboda is responsible for the violence in Kiev, plain and simple. It was Svoboda party members seen setting up barricades, throwing molotov cocktails at the police, firebombing synagogues, and taking government supporters hostage. They are a violent fascist political party and we know this not just from the propaganda-littered media coming out of Russia, but from Ukrainian media itself and, much more importantly, from political scholars such as Andreas Umland, a German-Ukrainian transplant turned professor of political science at National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Ukraine, and from Tadeusz A. Olszański from the Center for Eastern Studies.
Studying and teaching at a Catholic college known for being heavily acculturated to Westernization, Umland can by no means be called a Nazi sympathizer. At the same time, his PhD from Cambridge and fellowships at both Harvard and Stanford combined with an extensive background in German, Russian and Ukrainian right-wing political science and how it affects foreign and domestic policy in the region clearly show his non-partisan approach to education — that is to say, being the author of books such as “Fascism Past and Present, West and East: An International Debate on Concepts and Cases in the Comparative Study of the Extreme Right” and editing an online journal on Russian nationalism shows Umland’s interests lie solely in education and disseminating an accurate portrayal of fascism, througout history and in contemporary culture, without any political platform attached. If a scholar who has spent decades studying right-wing nationalist politics in the region calls the Svoboda party a party of racism and fascism, it’s hard to rebut.
Svoboda has been almost entirely glossed over in the U.S. media and, when spoken about at all, Russia and Putin are almost always used as a proxy. For example, in an article from The Economist, the author repeats the lie from a Ukrainian local (presumably a government supporter) that “no one has seen any fascists in the East,” yet, there is documented evidence of Svoboda’s history of nationalist behavior such as racist remarks towards Jews and talks of “one race” and “Jewish scum”, not to mention the fact that the first emblem of the party was the Wolfsangel, a symbol of the Nazi party of Germany during WWII. When the Svobodas experienced social backlash for use of the symbol, they subsequently ceased and even pulled the shifty maneuver of changing their name from the former “Social Nationalist Party” to Svoboda.
What’s more, out of all three of the opposition leaders in the Ukrainian revolution, one of them is the head of Svoboda, Oleh Tyahnybok. As Olszański wrote in his OSW Commentary in 2011 that the “Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc claimed that the pro-government media’s marked interest in Svoboda was proof that the party is a puppet if not a spy ring,” which not only offers some insight into the distrust of the opposition leaders towards each other, but how Svoboda looks to be working on behalf of a foreign entity (possibly the U.S.) or at least be infiltrated enough to scare the Fatherland party into hesitation.
One thing is for sure, however: To be certain, there are indeed a large number of fascists involved in the Ukrainian revolution and, as the BBC’s Newsroom reported, many of these fascists were at the front lines of the violent coup in February. Why, then, does the U.S. media keep parroting the term “Russian propaganda” when talking about Ukrainian fascism, especially when the head of Svoboda is one of the opposition leaders? If you look at how the coup began, you will get your answer.
U.S. Diplomat Victoria Nuland’s Role In Ukrainian Coup
In the below video you’ll witness Victoria Nuland use words like “peace”, “assist” and “negotiation” to describe how she gave Ukrainian president Yanukovich an ultimatum of U.S. intervention after the Kiev police had used tear gas on its citizens during a peaceful demonstration on December 10th. She describes the use of force by the police as “appalling” and how Secretary of State John Kerry “wasted no time to express the United State’s disgust”, yet this is the same riot police action carried out against U.S. citizens in the Occupy protests in 2011. (One has to wonder where she was when that happened?) Next, she goes on to explain that, since Ukraine’s independence in 1990, the U.S. has given 5 billion dollars to the country and that Yanukovich needs to stop dragging his feet on signing the AA (Association Agreement) with the European Union. Later, in a leaked phone call between Nuland and Pyatt that made headline news because of her sentiment to, “Fuck the EU,” there was heavy evidence of the U.S.’s role in the revolt with the two discussing who should be in office after the coup.
The protesting continued with little violence throughout December and into January 2014 while Nuland carried out talks with the opposition when it became clear that Yanukovich had no intention of signing the agreement and continued sending riot police out to bully demonstrators. Nuland even walked around Kiev handing out cookies to protestors like she was at a children’s birthday party and then met with a known fascist to talk about how he could rally Svoboda supporters to fight against the police. These meetings with the opposition are where the consent to force was clearly given, or simply not discussed, because by the end of February even online rags like Salon were reporting Neo-Nazi violence at the front-lines of the revolution:
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.
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.”
“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.”
With Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok as one of three contenders for office after the coup that Pratt and Nuland spoke of in their phone call, thirty percent sounds about right. In fact, this may make for a bigger problem after the new government is set up when Tyahnybok begins receiving hate-mail from his Svoboda supporters — after all, no one likes being used.
Despite the fact that the U.S. has been outspokenly against fascism for decades, we seem to have no problem using it to gain control over another region of the world. Yes, fascists are not the only protesters in Ukraine, and only a small fraction in fact, but they were the percentage willing to fight. Without them, Yanukovich would not have left the building.
CFR’s Usual Government Toppling Routine
To enforce U.S. support for our intervention, a video was released in early February entitled “I am Ukrainian” featuring a young woman calling for help from the international community — speaking in English and released on Youtube through a channel entitled A Whisper To A Roar — and received over 7 million views thus far. While the professionalism of the production begged the question of who created it, the answer is only a couple clicks away. On the “Behind the Scenes” page of awhispertoroar.com, it dubs Larry Diamond as the Inspiration & Executive Producer of video. Diamond happens to be a member of both the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
Wherever there is regime change in which the U.S. gets involved, the CFR has a suspicious interaction from the beginning, the most recent being Iraq where almost every U.S. politician who were also CFR members pushed for war. The trouble with this approach is that there is no governmental oversight of the CFR, it’s literally an organization full of some of the most powerful and influential people of the United States who conduct meetings behind closed doors regarding foreign policy decisions and globalization. If you combine this with the fact that NED is heavily funded by the government (135 million a year), it means your tax dollars are going towards pro-war and pro-globalization agendas.
NED being an NGO (non-governmental organization) and pretending to be dedicated to spreading democracy is where the trouble begins. In the 1980s, the Cold War had created a terrible image of the CIA spying overseas and interfering with foreign politics covertly in such a broad manner that Ronald Reagan needed some serious PR to balance it out, and thus NED was born. On the surface, NED sounds like a great opportunity to teach the world about democracy: funding is split between various programs in foreign countries such as support for school programs, youth centers, human rights protections and free press. However, with continued funding flowing into Venezuala and Ukraine, places with severe civil unrest, and a propaganda video put together like “I am a Ukrainian”, one has to wonder what democracy means to NED, to the CFR and to the United States at large when firefights are breaking out and historical enemies like Russia are getting involved against our propped up opposition.
An Agenda of Globalization Through Petrodollars
The obvious marriage between petrodollars and NGOs is seen in the above video of Nuland where a large Chevron symbol hangs right next to the United States’ and Ukrainian flags. As Euronews reports, at least 30% of Europe’s gas supplies come from Russia via a Ukrainian pipeline. By controlling the Ukraine, the U.S. will control Russia and have more direct control over Europe through petrodollars, and already Ukraine has cut some sales of gas which puts Russia in a tough spot. Couple that with sanctions imposed on Russian-U.S. transit for political leaders and Russia begins to be dismantled.
It becomes clear that, as with any poor investment, the investor has decided to finally get involved to turn things around and see a return. The chance to force Ukraine further under the grip of oil and gas while propping up a puppet government neighboring Russia is a wet dream for the United States and being out five billion dollars would be the perfect justification at the Pentagon.