US-led West out to break Ukraine

Fleeting television images of Kiev streets in Ukraine have been invading our homes for the last few days. No doubt, these have been extremely disturbing. Initial protests of the people are giving way to the spectre of violent confrontation between riot police and fully armed rioters in battle gears hurling Molotov Cocktails, forcibly laying siege on official buildings including Rada –the Ukrainian Parliament.

The western mainstream media in Europe and US would be happy to make us believe that this is a genuine popular revolution to depose the ‘tyrant’- the elected President Viktor Yanukovich. But the politics of ‘regime change’ has played out with such frequent regularity in the past that trying to unravel the layers of ‘myth’ and disinformation assumes urgency. And for us in India, it is of no less significance; because even though Ukraine appears to be far removed – what information is trickling out in dribbles pose grave threat--perhaps the train of events have potential of playing out as a deeply destabilising new cold-war.

But already the veneer of a ‘revolution’ against President Yanukovich is coming unstuck; the mob with full throated support from the West, particularly the US has managed to depose him. The mob has taken over the reins of power in Kiev. And with unconcealed hurry, the US administration has recognised the new regime.

The unusual circumstances in which the new regime replacing the constitutionally-elected President is being viewed by the West and being amplified by the media betray the nature of the change. A full-fledged civil war has broken out in Crimea, where not only the people but the elected Parliament has demanded cessation from Ukraine giving vent against the illegitimate nature of the new power structure in Kiev.

What the mainstream public discourse in West is completely missing out is the heterogeneity of Ukraine; as one of the foremost experts on Russian affairs Prof Stephen Cohen put it- “….contrary to what the American media, which speaks about the Ukraine and the Ukrainian people. Historically, ethnically, religiously, culturally, politically, economically, it’s two countries. One half wants to stay close to Russia; the other wants to go West”.

The post-Soviet reconstruction of this Eurasian region has seen constant attempts by the US Empire to expand its sphere of economic have been on conspicuous evidence. Since the 1990s, the US-led West has been on a steady intrusion toward post-Soviet Russia, began with the expansion of NATO in the 1990s under Clinton. Bush then further expanded NATO to Russia’s borders. Funding of entities euphemistically called NGOs, but in reality, political action groups, financed by West, operating inside Russia were facilitated. This was followed by the decision to build missile defense installations along Russia’s borders; allegedly against Iran, a country which has neither nuclear weapons nor commensurate delivery systems. Subsequently, American military outposts were sought to be thrust upon the former Soviet republic of Georgia, leading to the 2008 war. That it turned out to be damp squib for the West is a different proposition altogether.

That the current episode in Ukraine is in the same sequence of events is apparent. The train of events started in November last year with Yanukovich refusing to conclude an agreement with Europe which apart from a financial component also included a proposal for military cooperation. In plain words, this meant integration with NATO. However, the attempts to draw in Ukraine within the Western fold was sought to be achieved for ‘pittance’. The economic crisis which had been threatening Ukraine, like many other countries of Europe, needed a massive dose of ‘financial’ support running into billions of Dollars. The EU proposal for the pact promised only some millions and that too, with accompaniment of the infamous ‘austerity’ measures. In contrast Putin offered $ 15billion and concessions in gas supply.

In explaining the genesis of the current crisis and its backdrop, the Western media has sited Yanukovich’s Russian tilt in spurning the European offer. But an objective comparison of what was on offer from Russia and EU the real reason would become abundantly clear.

With facts coming out about the build up and spread of opposition and subsequent violence in Kiev and rest of Ukraine for ‘freedom’ leading to eventual deposing of the elected President, an extremely sinister picture is laid bare. It’s apparent that with the protest turning violent the neo-fascists have gained significantly and hold the key to the course of development.

Svoboda- the freedom party of ultranationalists and neo-Nazis’ role has grown with its activists make up much of the street muscle on the square, standing on ladders on the barricades, wearing bicycle helmets and ski masks, and toting clubs of table legs or pipe, on the lookout for the riot police. Their philosophy is apparent through their leader, Oleg Tyagnibok’s words-“Nationalism is love of the land, love of the people who live on the land, and it is love of a mother. Love of a mother cannot be bad.” Arseniy Yatsenyuk –a moderate leader has candidly conceded that “there are a number of forces who are uncontrolled. This is the truth……Ukraine is in a big mess”. This force-Svoboda-is hell bent on glossing over the diverse and composite nature of Ukraine. But with Ukraine becoming a major theatre of confrontation to secure spheres of influence, US-led West and their media is lionising Svoboda and the rest of the pro-West forces. It is almost a repeat of what happened in Libya and Syria, with West ending up in emboldening Islamic extremists.

But it is also becoming evident that the US is not a chance development but outcome of carefully nurtured scheme to get at Russia with creating a hostile regime at its doorsteps. While President Obama has vowed to "continue to engage all sides," a recently revealed audio recording between two top officials of the Obama administration Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt, show that they have been secretly plotting with the opposition.

While Russia did not force any choice on Yanukovich between themselves and the West, the EU had done just that; asking the President –Bush like--to make a choice. This has resulted in what Prof Cohen describes as drawing divide through the very heart of the Slavic civilisation.

The outcome is the inevitable. Responding to dangerous change in Kiev, the Russian majority autonomy of Crimea had effected a change in their own government and invited Russia to intervene for safeguarding their security and autonomy. Consequently, Putin with sanctions from the upper house of the Russian Parliament has sent in the troops.

The war drums are sounding in Ukraine. The situation is spinning out of control. And the world is on the threshold of a military confrontation. The global economy reeling under recession is threatened as a result of the misadventure of the Empire to expand its sphere of influence. Sanity must be restored. Status quo-ante allowing the Ukrainian people to deal with their domestic problems without outside interference must be the watchword for reestablishing peace.

nilotpalbasu@gmail.com