Ukrainian political
history is extremely complicated but it is now simplified by Western media. We
are being told who is in the wrong as if the issues are black and white, who
are the aggressors, who shot down MH-17, and how we need to arm the Eastern
bloc European countries. And the winner is!.....the arms merchants.
Furthermore, some of the
rhetoric has made no sense. John Kerry, US Vice-President, demands that
“Russian disarm the separatists”. How, exactly, was Russia going to take the
weapons away from the dissidents in another country?
The United States has
admitted that it put millions of dollars into the protests that eventually
brought down the previous Ukrainian president (remember, the one who was going
to align with the Russians instead of the EU). A Western-friendly multi-million
dollar chocolatier becomes president after an election that barely passes for
legal.
Unanswered questions:
why was the US in there in the first place? Why are they supporting a despot
(“West-friendly” doesn’t mean “democratic”)? Why is it ok for the West to
supply arms to the one side if it is wrong for Russia to supply the other
(whether they are or not)?
The Eastern
often-Russian speaking Ukrainians do not want separatism. Or at least they
didn’t until the media started reporting it. For years they have wanted a
federal arrangement with the Ukrainian government, much like Quebec with
Canada. Putin has asked for meetings to
resolve the issue. The US says, “no meetings until you do what we are asking.” Putin
doesn’t seem to be a particularly nice guy but at least he has called for the
separatists to halt their activities and for the government to move its army
out of the contested areas; the US insists that the government has the right to
put down dissent by military means.
I hear drum beats and
see false flags. Remember the lead-ups to Afghanistan – “gotta get Bin Laden”,
Iraq – weapons of mass destruction, Iraq – babies being thrown out of incubators?
A million people have
been displaced because one country decided to meddle in the politics of
another. This time the two international players are facing off with aging
nuclear weapons fleets and aging computer systems. Will not calmer heads
prevail?
