Just a month ago, Putin had one of his pet oligarchs, the firmly pro-Russian multi-billionaire Yanukovich, in power in Ukraine. Putin had been to an awful lot of trouble to ensure that Yanukovich got elected. It is undoubtedly true that the United States and its allies funded various pro-western groups in the Ukraine – my friend Ray McGovern, former senior CIA, put a figure of US$100 million on it, and he should know. The resources Putin poured in to ensure Yanukovich’s election were more in kind than financial, but were not on too different a scale.
In earlier attempts to put Yanukovich in power, Putin had in 2004 helped organise massive electoral fraud, and Putin’s secret service had attempted to assassinate Victor Yushchenko. The 2010 election of Yanukovich also involved a great deal of fraud. Russia is an influential member of the OSCE, Ukraine is also a member and that organization is notably mealy-mouthed in pointing out the derelictions of its own members. Nonetheless its observation mission of the 2010 Presidential elections stated:
“The presidential election met most OSCE commitments and other international standards for democratic elections and consolidated progress achieved since 2004. The process was transparent and offered voters a genuine choice between candidates representing diverse political views. However, unsubstantiated allegations of large-scale electoral fraud negatively affected the election atmosphere and voter confidence in the process.”
That is about as close as the OSCE has ever come to accusing one of its own members of fraud. International organisations have their obvious limitations.
Putin had put years of effort into getting the President of Ukraine which he wanted, and he had him. Yanukovich attempted to steer an even-handed path between Russia and the West, while putting his main effort into acquiring an astonishing personal fortune. Putin lost patience when Yanukovich appeared ready to sign an EU association agreement, and put extremely heavy pressure on Yanukovich over debt, energy supplies, and doubtless some deeply personal pressures too. Yanukovich backed down from the EU Association agreement and signed a new trade deal with Russia, appearing on the path to Putin’s cherished new Eurasian customs union.
The west – and not only the west – of Ukraine erupted into popular protest. The reason for this is perfectly simple. Income, lifestyle, education, health and social security for ordinary people are far better in western and central Europe than they are in Russia. The standard of living for ordinary Polish people in Poland has caught up at a tremendous rate towards the rest of the EU. I am not depending on statistics here – I have lived in Poland, travelled widely in Poland and speak Polish. I was professionally involved in the process of Polish economic transformation. There have been a large number of commenters on this blog this last few days who deny that the standard of living for ordinary people in Poland is better as a result of EU membership, and believe life for ordinary people is better in Russia than in the west. I also of course speak Russian and have travelled widely in Russia. Frankly, you have to be so ideologically blinkered to believe that, I have no concerns if such people leave this blog and never come back; they are incapable of independent thought anyway.
Undoubtedly pro-western groups financed by the US and others played a part in the anti-Yanukovich movement. They may have had a catalytic role, but that cannot detract from the upswell of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians who were not paid by the West, and drove Yanukovich from power. It is true that, when the situation became violent some very unpleasant nationalist, even fascist, groups came to the fore. There is a great deal of extreme right wing thuggery in all the former Soviet Union – ask Uzbeks who live in Russia. The current government in power in Kiev seem a diverse bunch, and seem to include some pleasant people and some very unpleasant people. Elections this year will make things clearer. It is also true that corruption is the norm among the Ukrainian political elite, across any nationalist or ideological divides.
In a very short space of time, Putin went from the triumph of killing off the EU Association agreement to the disaster of completely losing control of Kiev. But for reasons including trade, infrastructure and debt, the new government was bound to come back to some relationship and accommodation with Putin eventually. It just needed patience.
Instead of which, Putin decided to go for a macho seizure of the Crimea. There is no doubt that the actions of surrounding military bases and government buildings by Russian forces, and controlling roads and borders, are illegal under international law. There also appears little doubt that a large proportion of Crimea’s population would like union with Russia, though whether a genuine majority I am not sure. I am sure under these circumstances of intimidation and military occupation, the referendum will show a massive majority. Hitler pulled the same trick.
So now Putin can stride the stage as the macho guy who outfoxed the west and used his military to win Crimea for Mother Russia. But it is an extremely hollow victory. He has gained Crimea, but lost the other 95% of the Ukraine, over which one month ago he exercised a massive political influence.
The western powers will not bring any really effective sanctions that would harm the financial interests of the interconnected super-rich, be they Russian oligarchs or City bankers. But they will now do what they were not prepared to do before, provide enough resources to make Ukraine politically free of Russia. The EU has already agreed to match the US$19 billion in guarantees Putin had promised to Yanukovich. Before the annexation of Crimea the EU was not prepared to do that.
The Crimea was the only ethnic Russian majority province in Ukraine. Donetsk does not have an ethnic Russian majority, only a Russian speaking majority – just like Cardiff has an English speaking majority. The difference is key to understand the situation, and largely ignored by the mainstream media. Without Crimea, the chances of the pro-Putin forces in the rest of Ukraine ever mustering an electoral majority are extremely slim. Putin has gained Crimea and lost Ukraine – has he really won?
The real tragedy, of course, is that Ukraine’s relationships are viewed as a zero-sum game. Russia has huge interests in common with Europe. I hope to see Ukraine a member of the EU in the next decade, and Putin has made that vastly more likely than it was a month ago. But why does that have to preclude a close economic relationship with Russia? The EU should not operate as a barrier against the rest of the world, but as a zone of complete freedom within and ever-expanding freedom to and from without. And European Union will never be complete until Russia, one of the greatest of European cultures, is a member.
@uzbek “I have been living in the UK for some years now, but I never seen toilet without sewage in the UK” – yer want to come up to Suffolk boy, we’ve got lots of ’em.
So many pundits looking at the world through the lens of the bourgeois myth of “progress”, every damn one of you. What Ukraine has is fertile land and a small population to enjoy it. When all your IMF loans and measures of “standard of living” have fallen into the cauldron of climate chaos and technological breakdown, what remains of the population of “Ukraine” will do just fine I’ll wager.
Ash toilets are fine, if you have the land. Urine is a powerful fertiliser thanks to the urea content (apparently they used to use it in the famed orchid greenhouses of Singapore, possibly still do). Progress along the lines of received wisdom is not all it’s made up to be, you do know that?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/07/us-ukraine-crisis-troops-idUSBREA260PW20140307
Russian troops doubled in Crimea.
Course, if you actually read the piece:
“Serhiy Astakhov, aide to the head of border guards service, told Reuters the figure was an estimate”
Where is General Accounting when you need them? We need an audit. Stat !
Craig’s version of events may be true but it omits a key factor from Russia’s point of view – NATO.
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Kremlin has suspected that NATO (ie the US) was determined to move its forces ever closer to the Russian border in order to maximize its military and political leverage over Moscow.
Who can blame them? The world is dominated by an imperial power to an extent hitherto unknown in human history, and that power has been intent on “containing” Russia and China – its only potential rivals – for the past 70 years. Would British “leaders” have reacted differently in the same circumstances, given that Obama was pressing Kiev to permit NATO military exercises in Ukraine?
(By the way, it may be satisfying to compare Putin’s actions to those of Hitler in the 1930s, but it doesn’t get us anywhere. The US invaded Mexico in the 1840s and annexed much of what is now the American West, to the enduring chagrin of the Mexicans. Britain spent much of the past 200 years invading, occupying and despoiling places all over the world. By these standards, Putin has committed an unfortunate indiscretion).
John Goss,
“Whatever Putin’s tactics in the election of Yanukovich it was Yanukovich who was in power when overthrown by a rogue element from among the protestors.”
Cheers men. Rouge elements you say? Is that what you are branding some protesters now? I shall remember this. In May 2005 hundreds of protesters were killed in Uzbek city of Andijan, by another elected (and legitimate) president. That time so called “rouge protesters” lost. But John Goss gives no sh..t. They were rouge anyway.
I recommend this Russian blogger living in Florida; here is an excellent piece about Russia after Yeltsin, and he writes a lot about Ukraine too
http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.be/2013/10/1993-2013-is-twenty-years-long-pas-de.html
Rouge should be rogue, unless you meant Reds under the bed.
Andy
“Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Kremlin has suspected that NATO (ie the US) was determined to move its forces ever closer to the Russian border in order to maximize its military and political leverage over Moscow.”
It is indeed very common believe amongst KGB. And since they rule Russia today it is indeed common believe in Russia today. But fact is that it is Russia today who is blackmailing Europe (most of whom are NATO members) not at least with energy as a weapon. How does NATO expansion rhetoric explains this?
Grownups .
Look. Whatever the truth about Putin (Prince of Darkness), the known facts just don’t support the narrative that our corporate media would have us believe.
Just to name a few:
Nuland’s “$5 billion to destabilise Ukraine boast”.
Nuland’s hacked “Fuck the EU” and micro-manage the coup hacked phonecall.
The “Russian Invasion” of Ukraine.
Third Party Snipers.
The legality of the new Ukraine “government”.
I could go on and on…… but I’ll spare you all. I’m sure you get what I’m driving at and it either confirms or contradicts your beliefs.
Whatever is the truth about Putin, there are Millions of Russians, but also many Ukrainians, Europeans and Americans whose lives are touched in one way or another by what happened last time US financial elites sponsored the seizure of power by fascists in Europe. For them, whether the nominal head of state in Russia is Putin or Noddy, the sentiment of “Never Again” is more than an empty slogan and they will act on this in whatever ways they can.
“Ceux qui peuvent vous faire croire à des absurdités peuvent vous faire commettre des atrocités” Voltaire
Headache
This is VERY BLOODY low from troll blogger with ribbon of St George and Russia stands for freedom motto.
“Politkovskaya “murdered by KGB goons”
Do you question this? Is this also CIA propoganda?
Cheers Ben. Will be more careful with words next time.
In Smaller Freedom
7 Mar, 2014 – 8:53 pm
I still say give Ukraine a chance. I read that some lefties claimed that it would take Germany half a century to pay for unification and yet it did not turn out to be that bad.
You are not suggesting that it would be better for Ukraine to be like Belarus, do not you?
Uzbek in the UK,
Your point is similar to the argument that China can ‘blackmail’ the US because it’s Washington’s biggest creditor. In fact, the two are inextricably dependent on each other, just as Russia and the EU now are. Cutting off energy supplies to the EU would hurt Russia as well as the EU so any attempt at ‘blackmail’ would be foolish. I think Putin genuinely wants to settle this dispute now but, assuming that Obama also wants a settlement, events may have moved too far to permit a quick solution.
Sofia Kibo Noh
7 Mar, 2014 – 9:58 pm
It was actually many more Belorussians and Ukrainians who were killed or died because of Nazi occupation. 1 in 4 in Belarus and 1 in 8 in Ukraine.
Andy
Never underestimate KGB officer. Yes, gas blackmail could hurt Russia, but it is Putin who has better cards in this play. We have witnessed gas blockade (by Russia) few years ago. Turned out to be more devastating for Europeans (eastern mostly) than for Kremlin.
Comparison with China although seem to be relevant but in fact Communist government in Beijing seem to be more into profit making and economy first, than seemingly market economy Russia under KGB leadership.
“Where is General Accounting when you need them? We need an audit” – no, you need better sources.
“Never underestimate KGB officer. Yes, gas blackmail could hurt Russia, but it is Putin who has better cards in this play. We have witnessed gas blockade (by Russia) few years ago. Turned out to be more devastating for Europeans (eastern mostly) than for Kremlin.”
But that wasn’t political, that was business, if someone refuses to pay the gas company their gas gets cut off. The gas to Europe wasn’t cut off, the gas to Europe was stolen.
Ben
Sorry, honestly don’t know – we do have volunteer mods who try to keep the personal abuse down. I don’t supervise on a comment by comment basis.
“Never underestimate KGB officer” – I would always underestimate KGB officer, just for the fun of it. Honestly they’re nothing, compared to the peaceful centre.
Russian forces stormed Ukrainian base in Sevastopol, Crimea
Use translate http://lenta.ru/news/2014/03/07/storm/
Fred
You can put it this way. Or any other way Mr Putin puts it.
The fact was that Europeans were left without gas supply for over 2 weeks, while Europeans were paying for gas with no delays. May be Russia needs to diversify its gas delivery to Europe. Or even better let Europeans to diversify their gas supply, from Central Asia for instance? Is this not pure business too, or politics after all?
“You can put it this way. Or any other way Mr Putin puts it.”
I can just tell it how it is.
Fact is Russia put the gas for Europe into the pipe.
Fact is it was syphoned off before it got to it’s destination. Unless you’re suggesting Russia should have put troops into a sovereign state to protect the gas in transit.
Fact is there was no blockade of European gas by Russia.
Fact is Europe was not left without gas for two weeks because it was only pipelines through Ukraine that were affected, the pipes through Belarus carried on delivering and Europe only gets a third of their gas from Russia anyway.
If that interferes with what you want to believe it isn’t my fault.
If Russian backed rebels managed to pull off a coup in Britain then I would imagine a very big majority of Brits would welcome unmarked US troops defending the country, and although I would be rather surprised if we would go so far as to vote to join America, the US could engineer a reverse take over and petition the Crown to resume her head as head of the US, which would kind of legitimise such action. But quite frankly in these circumstances action comes first and legitimacy second.
Of course I have no evidence of Western or American backing for the Ukrainian coup, but even if there was none the Russian action is still basically an obvious reaction that was pretty much likely to occur. after the coup. Was the coup planned or was it a response. I have no idea as to the extent which these events are partly planned and if so by who / who was the leader planner, whether both sides saw what was coming and gamed it accordingly, nor as to where either see the end game???
At the time I followed the alleged Yushchenko assassination attempt very closely. It was claimed to be by dioxin poisoning. There was never any convincing evidence presented in the media that he even had dioxin in his system. This story was weird from the very beginning. No self respecting assassin would even try to use dioxin in the first place. It is just not that toxic with an LS50 in the grams. The main symptom he displayed was a severe rosacea. This could be caused by dioxin intoxication but it is a symptom with many causes — the most common being excessive alcohol intake over a long period of time.
Why is Craig so sure it was an assassination attempt and what evidence was there, if it was, that it was done by Russian agents? I suspect excessive dislike of the Russians is affecting his judgement.
Oh come on I can recognise that there is some logic to Russia’s action in the Crimea, but the poisoning of Yushchenko was a pretty obvious case of poisoning.
It appears that Mary’s champion achieved, in just a few posts, what her enemies could not in thousands.
Was over at mondoweiss there…
Some interesting Discussion Re Nuland, her husband and Co…All the Crazy Connections…it’s a Dazzling web indeed… But far from Healthy for Humanity and any kind of peace…any time soon
Here is part of a post by – Bandolero –
What could be the overall motive behind all this?
Quote Clifford A. Kiracofe, former senior professional staff member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations:
“… Western media reported the vulgar remarks concerning the EU by Victoria Nuland, who is US assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs.
The media refrained from reporting that Nuland is the wife of Robert Kagan who is a key leader of the pro-Zionist neoconservative policy network.
It is well known that the staunchly pro-Israel neoconservatives express deep political and cultural aversion to Russia, and promote Cold War perspectives. Such a mindset undermines US global diplomacy and US national interests.
Thus Ms Nuland is the wrong person for a high US diplomatic position, critics say.
Using the Ukraine crisis to subvert major power relations between the US and Russia and their constructive joint action in the Middle East serves Israeli interests. It helps Israel and its neoconservative allies in the US and in Europe push for unilateral US military action against Syria and Iran. …”
And Here is a reply from Annie Robbins, Editor at Large for Mondoweiss
and robert’s bro is Frederick Kagan married to kimberly kagan president of the Institute for the Study of War, the same institute elizabeth o’bagy worked for. remember her? the ‘expert’ who kerry cited alleging the a jihadist-dominated opposition in syria was ‘moderate’. the same institute pushing us to invade Syria?
The Full Article includes part of a Putin interview,
From Time Magazine 2007 “Person of the Year” Interview:
” For 15 years, we were selling them energy resources way below the market prices subsidized to the tune of $3 billion to $5 billion a year for Ukraine. This cannot last forever. The Europeans are always criticizing us. They want us to introduce international pricing standards. Otherwise, they say, our enterprises would enjoy an unfair advantage over European enterprises. So within the country we should sell at world prices while to our neighbors we should sell below the world prices? This is discrimination.
More of this Piece @
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/03/department-midwives-democracy.html
I’ve no doubt Mary will be back.
For a year or two i thought i sensed this blog was under concerted Sayanim/troll attack but then it seemed to be that Mary herself was more attacked on a personal basis.
An ugly tactic-if true.
Ive been on this blog for 8 years or so and,in my opinion,a year or two back it seemed Habbabkuk and friends invaded this blog and targeted her with personal and unsettling tactics-not points of fact ordiscussion.
Very sinister.
She seemed to be under concerted attack from about 8,or more,at once.
Not nice.
Which is insane because i’ve never thought of Mary as an anti-Semite at all…just a pro-Palestinian.
I’ve no doubt Mary will return imminently.
She is a part of this blog as much as anyone-and i know she doesn’t need my support or backup.