It was also predicted that the regime in Kiev, backed by the US and EU, would use the pretext of “war with Russia” to arm itself against the inevitable uprising to come.
It now appears that the “anti-Maidan” has begun, and that the military backing by NATO will be mobilized against fellow Ukrainians much sooner than expected.
With Crimea now beginning its integration with Russia, others in eastern Ukraine see a window of opportunity to escape out from beneath the regime in Kiev before it is able to consolidate its power and stamp out resistance to its inevitably disastrous policies. Protesters have been gathering in key cities across eastern Ukraine, while armed militias begin digging in against Kiev’s overt threats and now demonstrably preparations to carry out violence. CNN would report in their article, “Ukraine unrest will be resolved by force or talks in 48 hours, minister says,” that:
Ukrainian acting Interior Minister Arsen Avakov said Wednesday that the separatist protests in Ukraine’s eastern region would be resolved within 48 hours — either through negotiations or the use of force.
The Guardian in its article, “Armed pro-Russian protesters seize city in eastern Ukraine,” describes multiple cities being taken over by Ukrainians opposed to the regime in Kiev. While the Guardian continues to spin the narrative that Russia is “annexing” eastern Ukraine like it did Crimea – this sidesteps the reality that Crimea voted overwhelmingly (93% according to the BBC) to voluntarily declare independence from Kiev, and integrate with Russia. Claims that Russian troops have “invaded” Ukraine, intentionally omit that Russian troops, per long standing treaties, have been stationed in Ukrainian territory for decades.
Despite the referendum, the Western media still refers to the newly integrated peninsula as “Russian-occupied Crimea.”
Who are Ukrainians Fleeing via Pro-Russian Movement?
Another crucial aspect omitted or blatantly covered up by the Western media is the very nature of the regime that recently seized power in Kiev at the height of the so-called “Euromaidan” protests. As growing public awareness has highlighted the ultra-right, literal Nazis that led “Euromaidan,” the Western media has succeeded in sowing enough doubt to keep many on the fence regarding the ongoing Ukrainian crisis.
Reports out of Ukraine come either from pro-Western or pro-Russian sources, leaving objective observers with little to work with. However, by examining the political leaders of the current regime in Kiev, through the very Western sources now defending them, one can easily identify the racism, bigotry, Nazism, fascism, and violence that millions of Ukrainians are all too familiar with – familiar with enough to seize the opportunity to seek protection within and forge closer ties to Russia.
When people across the West wring their hands regarding “Russian aggression” against the “Euromaidan” protesters and the resulting, unelected government, this is who they are defending:
1. Svoboda: So prominent was Svoboda during the “Euromaidan” protests, that the United States sent US Senator John McCain to take the stage with Svoboda leaders in Kiev at the height of the unrest. Surely then, one might expect Svoboda to represent values similar to those in America. However, Svoboda has a long history of carrying on the toxic ideology of Adolf Hitler’s Nazis, with party leaders citing Nazi propaganda, espousing hatred toward Jews and homosexuals, and either being involved in violence, or tied to armed militant groups that have been.
In a January 2014 Spiegel Online article titled, “‘Prepared to Die’: The Right Wing’s Role in Ukrainian Protests,” it described Svoboda in no uncertain terms (emphasis added):
The Svoboda party also has excellent ties to Europe, but they are different from the ones that Klischko might prefer. It is allied with France’s right-wing Front National and with the Italian neo-fascist group Fiamma Tricolore. But when it comes to the oppression of homosexuality, representative [Igor] Myroshnychenko is very close to Russian President Vladimir Putin, even if he does all he can to counter Moscow’s influence in his country.
Myroshnychenko was press spokesman for the Ukrainian national football team in the lead up to the 2008 European Championships, but he isn’t exactly cosmopolitan. He would even like to see foreign professional football players deported because they “change Ukraine’s ethnic map.”
There have been other, similar incidents. In a 2012 debate over the Ukrainian-born American actress Mila Kunis, he said that she wasn’t Ukrainian, rather she was a “Jewess.”Indeed, anti-Semitism is part of the extremist party’s platform; until 2004, they called themselves the Social-National Party of Ukraine in an intentional reference to Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist party. Just last summer, a prominent leader of party youth was distributing texts from Nazi propaganda head Joseph Goebbels translated into Ukrainian.
While many in the Western media try to portray Svoboda’s ultra-right, Neo-Nazi ideology as a part of its past, just during the “Euromaidan” protests this same Igor Myroshnychenko was an acting Svoboda MP, and very much involved in some of the most notorious incidents of the conflict.
In Channel 4’s (UK), “Ukraine: far-right extremists at core of ‘democracy’ protest,” it mentions both Svoboda MP Myroshnychenko as well as current Svoboda party leader Oleh Tyahnybok (emphasis added):
In December US senator John McCain travelled to Ukraine to offer his support to the opposition, appearing on stage with leaders of the three opposition parties leading the protests – including the far-right Svoboda party.
Svoboda is currently Ukraine’s fourth biggest party and holds 36 seats in parliament. It is also part of the Alliance of European National Movements, along with the BNP and Hungary’s Jobbik.
Svoboda leader Oleh Tyahnybok is one of the faces of the protests, appearing regularly along with opposition leader and former boxer Vitali Klitschko (see picture right) voicing opposition to Putin’s influence over the region.
However, Tyahnybok has provoked controversy in the past with his anti-Semitic claims that a “Moscow-Jewish mafia” controls Ukraine.
In another Channel 4 report titled, “Far-right group at heart of Ukraine protests meet US senator,” it stated (emphasis added):
…in 2004 [Svoboda] leader Oleh Tyahnybok gave a speech attacking what he called “the Moscow-Jewish mafia ruling Ukraine” and in another speech declared: “the Moskali, Germans, Kikes and other scum who wanted to take away our Ukrainian state.”
Despite the controversy his statements attracted in the West, Tyahnybok was voted Person of the Year by readers of Ukrainian news magazine Korrespondent last year.
In another outburst from the party their deputy chief, Ihor Miroshnychenko, wrote an anti-Semitic attack on Mila Kunis on Facebook: “Kunis is not Ukrainian, she is a Yid. She is proud of it, so Star of David be with her.”
While many across the Western media attempt to portray ultra-right, anti-Semitic Neo-Nazi groups as a “small percent” of the Euromaidan movement, it should be noted that Svoboda alone took over 10% of the vote in the 2012 elections, held 36 seats in parliament, is considered Ukraine’s fourth-largest political party, and its leader, Tyahnybok, wasone of three major opposition leaders who in fact led the “Euromaidan” protests in the first place. Since seizing power, Svoboda has received top positions in three of the regime’s ministries.
Surely Svoboda’s central role in the “Euromaidan” protests and the subsequent regime that has resulted, is enough to debase the entire movement. Unfortunately, Svoboda is not the only party with a checkered, ultra-nationalist, Neo-Nazi past.
Source: RIA
2. The “Fatherland” Party: Even in name alone, the Fatherland Party echos the disturbing nationalist nomenclature of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party. Beneath the rhetorical similarities are disturbing parallels of more substance.
From the Fatherland Party is drawn the current “prime minister” of Ukraine, Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Yatsenyuk is a renowned bigot. He would catch the attention of Amnesty International in its 2008 report, “Overview of Lesbian and Gay Rights in Eastern Europe (.pdf), which cited him saying – when his views regarding homosexual marriage were labelled “conservative” – that:
”I do not agree. If a man has normal views, then you label him a conservative, but those who use drugs or promote sodomy – you label them a progressive person. All of these are perversions.”
In March 2013 denounced homosexuality as reported by LGBT Weekly’s “Leading Ukraine Opposition figure surprises supporters by denouncing gay marriage.” The report would state:
Leading Ukraine Opposition figure, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, risks disappointing liberal supporters of his All-Ukrainian Union “Fatherland” party, having publicly rejected gay marriage at a recent rally.Yatsenyuk was confronted by a representative of the Western-Ukrainian Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender community who said to him: “Many people live in love, but not in law. Promise me that if you become president, you will legalize same-sex relationships, and I promise that all gays and lesbians will vote for you.”
But Yatsenyuk, who leads “Fatherland” in the absence of jailed leader Yulia Tymoshenko, revealed that he rejects gay marriage because his personal beliefs stand in the way of any political position.
Mention of Yulia Tymoshenko is also important, as she has been at the center of Western pressure on the previous government of Viktor Yushchenko. Her imprisonment was portrayed by the West as “politically motivated,” despite her charges relating to what was rampant, overt corruption. Her recent release from prison was hailed by the West as part of building a “strong, prosperous, unified, and democratic Ukraine.”
However, memory is short in the West. An interesting report in the wake of her failed attempt to take power during 2010’s elections by The Jewish Week titled, “Change For Ukraine, But Likely Not For Jews,” portrayed Ukraine’s Jews in fear of a potential win by Tymoshenko whose “Fatherland Party” was perceived as both nationalist and anti-Semitic. How the anti-Semitic, ultra-right, Hitlerian “Fatherland Party” will help build a “strong, prosperous, unified, and democratic Ukraine” remains to be seen.
It should be noted that the “Fatherland Party” constituted the second largest political party in Ukraine before it seized power at the height of the “Euromaidan” protests. Far from a “small percent” of the “Euromaidan” movement, its intolerable bigotry is the rule, not the exception – a defining characteristic of those who have seized power in Kiev, not an anomaly.
3. Right Sector: It was recently admitted by the BBC, that while Neo-Nazi Svoboda and the ultra-right Fatherland Party led the rhetorical battle in Kiev’s
streets, the armed militants of “Right Sector” formed the fist of the movement. The video report featured visibly armed men sporting Nazi insignias who had forcibly seized and were occupying the headquarters of their political rivals. These included members of Right Sector – a hardline Neo-Nazi militant movement.
Many across the Western media still continue to portray the “Euromaidan” protesters as either entirely unarmed, or with only a small number of rouge extremists being armed. The BBC has conveniently attempted to claim that Right Sector is an “autonomous organisation with no leaders or formal membership.”
It must have come to the BBC’s surprise when the new regime in Kiev apparently assassinated one of Right Sector’s “nonexistent” leaders. Many believe the killing of Right Sector leader Oleksandr Muzychko was an attempt to eliminate both a dangerous political rival, and a source of constant embarrassment for a regime already struggling to establish much needed legitimacy. With the heavy lifting over, the regime in Kiev decided to clean up its political house. Even the Western press found it difficult to spin what was clearly a repeat of Adolf Hitler’s “Night of the Long Knives” against the armed militant group.
A Reuters report titled, “Ukraine orders disarming of armed groups after shooting,” sheds further light on just how large these militant groups actually are. It stated:
Ukraine’s parliament on Tuesday ordered security forces to disarm illegal armed groups as police shut down the Kiev base of a far-right nationalist group prominent in the overthrow of Viktor Yanukovich after a shooting incident in which three people were wounded.
Ukraine’s new leaders acted after Monday night’s violence in Kiev city centre, conscious that an increasing criminal climate could discredit the anti-Yanukovich uprising and be used by Moscow’s propaganda machine to show that law and order was breaking down in Ukraine.
The Reuters report would also claim:
Police on Monday night moved in on a city centre hotel where the far-right group Right Sector had its Kiev base after a man – said by police to be a member of the group – pulled out a gun and shot and wounded three people outside a restaurant.
While Reuters painstakingly attempts to avoid admitting “Euromaidan” protesters were armed, clearly Right Sector was and still is.
Collectively, the Kiev Regime is the Worst of History Repeating Itself
While Right Sector makes an easy target to attach and subsequently jettison away accusations of ultra-right Neo-Nazi ideology among the “Euromaidan” movement, it is only an overt example of the poorly disguised ultra-right Neo-Nazi ideology that drives Svoboda and the Fatherland Party. The regime in Kiev adheres to Nazism, regardless of the alleged “shade.” Their uncompromising political views are already being translated into policies that threaten millions across Ukraine. This includes legislation targeting Russian-speaking Ukrainians and the censorship of Russian media across the country.
Combined with the inevitable socioeconomic collapse the new regime’s relationship with the IMF has all but guaranteed, it is not difficult to understand why Ukrainians in both the east, and eventually in the west, will begin rising up against the unelected, Neo-Nazis, bigots, racists, and armed criminals occupying Kiev. It is the horrors of World War II repeating themselves, along with the economic collapse and social chaos that has just recently rocked Greece and is still reverberating across the EU. It is the very worst of history, both distant past and more recently, repeating itself again in Ukraine.
What is difficult to understand for some, is why people across the Western World are still defending the regime in Kiev, when it is so clearly not what it said it was, nor what the West continues to insist it is.
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
