Riots in Ukraine - What is really going on?

[truebrit71]

I heard an interesting conversation on the Thom Hartmann programme yesterday with Stephen Cohen that suggested that we in the west were being deliberately mis-led about the Kiev protests, and that we were being manipulated into coming down on the side of the rioters when in fact, the Leader of Ukraine may very well have been doing what was ultimately better for that country, based on the actual long-term goals of the EU/NATO alliance that gave them the ultimatum in the first place.

Obama is rumoured to be readying sanctions against Ukraine, I assume in a threat to try and get them back to the table to try and talk them out of siding with Putin, and the media here in the US is certainly banging the anti-Putin drum hard and loud...so what is ACTUALLY going on over there, and what is it all REALLY about?

[malaise]

1. Shhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Rec

[Pretzel_Warrior]

2. Like any of us can really know

But I put my money on Russia and its Ukraine stooge purposefully and violently reordering Ukraine to be more in line with their resource extracting fascist intent

Anyone on DU speaking well of Putin is full of shit.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

34. And anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together knows that the US's want influence

over Ukraine for the same fucking reason: so our corporate government can proceed with "their resource extracting fascist intent".

A new cold war may be brewing.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

35. why do you completely leave EU out of that power dynamic? You know...the main protagonist

along with Ukraine? EU is the world's largest trading block. They are a powerful big deal. Quit acting so American-centric. Of course the US has interest in the region due to pushing back expanding tyranny and repression emanating from Moscow. Additonally, we have close ties with EU from an economic, diplomatic, and military cooperation standpoint.

I would be fucking freaked out if the US WASN'T taking a role here.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

37. Yesm Ukraine is in Europe. We are not, but you can bet the goal is about resources for Western

powers and Western corporations and they don't give a shit about the people of Ukraine.

Most thinking people already understand the power struggle between Putin and the West and don't need a lesson on it.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

38. apparently some here do need the lesson

lesson over.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

3. What's going on is that Ukrainians are fed up with the corruption of their government.

And they have always been historically wary of Russia, and the move to embrace Russia by Yanukovych was the straw that broke the camel's back.

That's it in a nutshell. No shady conspiracy talk needed.

[truebrit71]

6. All of them, or just the pro-euro Ukranians?

My understanding is that the country has two fairly distinct and separate factions, the pro-euros and the pro-Russians, which is what makes the whole thing so complicated.

If it were simply a case of everyone being pissed off at the corrupt government, that would make the most sense, but that doesn't necessarily appear to be the case here, no?

[Are_grits_groceries]

9. There are more government backers especially in areas closer to Russia.

However, the entire country is in an uproar. We are seeing Kiev. Those around Lviv seceded? Or something.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

10. It's less of a pro-Euro thing than it is an anti-Russia thing.

That's what I don't think DUers or many in the West really grasp. People were less upset about not joining the EU than they were by the seeming embrace of Putin and Russia.

There is a centuries long history of sour relations between Russia and Ukraine, with Russia overwhelmingly having the upper hand through much of it (i.e. the Russian Empire, Soviet Union, etc.).

It's not just about being pissed off at a corrupt government, but people being pissed off at a corrupt government that has embraced Russia. That was the proverbial tipping point.

[joeybee12]

20. You're right...nt

[Are_grits_groceries]

4. It is so much more complicated.

Earlier post: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1002

I don't doubt that there have been others mucking around. However, Putin does not have clean hands either.
One of the real triggers to the protests was the curtailment of freedom by Yanukovich right after he met Putin.

[stevenleser]

5. That's not a surprise. The Russian state owned network gives the Russian point of view.

Here is my point of view centered around the recent phone call intercept. http://steveleser.blogspot.com/2014/02/transcript-of-my-feb-9-10-2014-segment.html

Transcript of my Feb 9-10 2014 Segment on Russian Intelligence intercept of US Diplomatic Phone Call
To hear the segment as I delivered it, click http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lesersense/2014/02/10/cbo-controversy-on-jobs-russian-intelligence-intercepts-calls-from-us-diplomats-1 and forward to about the 16th minute.

----------------------------------------------------------------

As many of you know there was a conversation between two American diplomats leaked to the press this week. The conversation was between U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland (C) and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt.

Nuland: OK... one more wrinkle for you Geoff. [A click can be heard] I can't remember if I told you this, or if I only told Washington this, that when I talked to Jeff Feltman [United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs] this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy Robert Serry did I write you that this morning?

Pyatt: Yeah I saw that.
Nuland: OK. He's now gotten both Serry and [UN Secretary General] Ban Ki-moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday. So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and to have the UN help glue it and, you know, **** the EU.

Pyatt: No, exactly. And I think we've got to do something to make it stick together because you can be pretty sure that if it does start to gain altitude, that the Russians will be working behind the scenes to try to torpedo it...

Now of course there are the geopolitical considerations to be discussed resulting from this. Some leaders in the EU expressed outrage, and of course they weren’t really outraged they just have to express it to appear like they are doing something. There were a few notable exceptions.

The office of EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said that they would not comment on “allegedly intercepted communication as a position of principle.”

“Intercepted private conversations aren’t part of the toolbox that we use to assist Ukraine,” said a spokesperson for Barroso.

The German newspaper Der Spiegel online published an opinion column titled “Relax, Europe.” Stating:

“Europe should simply laugh about the American F-word. Some humor would do no harm to the transatlantic relationship at the moment.”

Those are public statements; let me assure everyone that no leader in Europe is upset at the US or Assistant Secretary of State Nuland. In private, people say all kinds of things, all of you hearing this show, I am sure that at several points in your life, you have privately expressed frustration with even your best friends on occasion. Everybody knows that.

The curious thing about this is how it happened.

American officials immediately pointed the finger at Russian intelligence for the leak, Nuland herself referred to quote “remarkable tradecraft”, which is political and diplomatic speak for spying and intelligence actions. That is what I want to talk about because that is the really interesting aspect of this.

I think she is right and I think it is pretty obvious that this intercept and leak is the work of the Russians. They are the ones who have motive.

Russian intelligence is mostly conducted out of three agencies, the FSB, GRU and SVR. One of these three would be responsible for intercepting this call and disseminating it. My guess here is that this is the work of the GRU or Glavnye Raz-vedie-vatel-noye Uprav-linye which translates to main intelligence directorate.

But why would they do this now? In some ways it doesn’t seem to make sense. First of all, this is yet another blow to the narrative that had been set by Edward Snowden when seeking Asylum in Russia. A few weeks ago I noted how the problems Russia was having with ensuring that the Sochi Olympics were secure from terrorists was one problematic area for them because Snowden’s argument is that the US is going too far in its surveillance and espionage efforts against terrorism. If Russia is having problems dealing with terrorism but harboring Snowden, that is pretty hypocritical.

Now we have another instance of hypocrisy. One of the things that Snowden leaked was the idea that the US was listening in on the phone conversations of various diplomats. That is supposed to be bad. Now we have an example of Russia doing the same thing, yet they are giving Snowden asylum for leaking that the US did it.

That is some pretty serious hypocrisy.

Why would the Russian’s out themselves as hypocrites like this? While you are thinking that over, I should point out that countries usually do not advertise efforts by their intelligence agencies to the extent that this phone call intercept and dissemination did. That’s part of the whole point of covert operations. They are supposed to stay secret. You don’t want the public knowing, you don’t want your adversaries knowing. You can bet that this very second, US intelligence agencies are conducting a thorough investigation of how the Russians did this and are building new countermeasures and procedures into how diplomats and other officials do business.

So in terms of both keeping the US looking bad with respect to Russia on surveillance, this hurts Russia and it also potentially weakens Russia’s ability to eavesdrop on certainly the United States and perhaps other countries and groups in the future.

So again, why would they do this?

To me, the answer is obvious. I think the Russians are really worried about the situation in Ukraine.

A Russian expat friend just back from a trip to Russia said to me a week and a half ago, Steve, you have no idea how serious the Russians are about keeping complete control over the government and political situation in Ukraine. They will do everything they can to keep their guy in power over there and prevent Ukraine from joining the European Union.

The intercept of this phone call is confirmation of that as far as I am concerned. To give you all some more background, Russia’s preferred Ukranian candidate, Viktor Yanukovych was elected to the Presidency in Ukraine in 2010 and as of that moment, all progress towards Ukraine joining the European Union stopped. Prior to this, two Ukranian leaders, Victor Yushenko and Yulia Tymoshenko had been pursuing not only EU membership for Ukraine, but NATO membership for Ukraine.

Upon assuming power, Yanukovych’s governing of Ukraine can be described as pretty much exactly how Putin wants him to govern Ukraine. Ukraine has become a satellite of Russia under Yanukovych. EU and NATO membership for Ukraine is something that Putin does not want to see happen because if and when that happens, Russia’s influence over Ukraine will be weakened permanently.

In November of 2013, Yanukovych formally rejected an accord with the European Union in favor of stronger ties to Russia. Ever since then, protests have erupted in Ukraine which turned violent in January. The BBC reports that this is the worst unrest in the country since Ukraine’s independence from the former Soviet Union in 1991.

The pro-European Union rallies have drawn crowds in Ukraine’s capitol of Kiev numbering in the hundreds of thousands of people. Putin fears losing control of Ukraine and he hates that the US is playing a role in trying to mediate a solution to the crisis.

That is why Putin ordered the Russian intelligence services to risk exposing themselves by intercepting and releasing this phone conversation. It is a move motivated by desperation by a man who wants to maintain control of Ukraine and fears he is about to lose it.

In case any more evidence is needed about how seriously Russia views its control of Ukraine, curious things have happened to both prior Ukranian leaders who wanted to forge closer relationships between Ukraine and Europe and the US.

I mentioned Victor Yushenko earlier. In 2004 in the middle of an election against the current President of Ukraine, Yanukovich, Mr. Yushenko was poisoned with the Dioxin Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin. Mr. Yushenko won that election and became President of Ukraine. On September 27, 2009 Yushchenko said in an interview that the testimony of three men who were at a dinner in 2004 at which he believes he was poisoned is crucial to finishing the investigation, and he claimed these men were in Russia. And, surprise, surprise, Ukrainian prosecutors said Russia has refused to extradite one of the men, the former deputy chief of Ukraine's security service, Volodymyr Satsyuk, because he holds both Russian and Ukrainian citizenship.

That is the experience of one leader who wanted to take Ukraine into a closer relationship with the EU and the United States. Another such leader, Yulia Tymoshenko, the former Prime Minister of Ukraine was thrown in jail after Yanukovich came to power and her trial and imprisonment is viewed by many in the international community, not least of which the Danish Helsinki committee as a politically motivated imprisonment. The European Court on Human Rights said in an April 30, 2013 judgment that Tymoshenko’s arrest had been politically motivated and her rights had been violated. She has sat in prison since 2011 under a seven year sentence.

Russia particularly has it in for Ms Tymoshenko because of a role she played in a gas dispute between Ukraine and Russia back in 2009 where it is said she directly angered Putin.

So if you want to understand how ruthless Putin is willing to be with regards to keeping control over Ukraine, just look at what has happened to the two highest profile Ukranian Leaders who wanted to move Ukraine from a Russian centered foreign policy, to a European Union centered foreign policy,

Once you understand the background, what happened here and why becomes much more clear. This phone intercept and its release was part of a deliberate plan to hinder the US efforts to mediate the Ukraine crisis and the Russians hoped it would put a wedge between US and the EU precisely when they should be working together on Ukraine to help remove her from Russian domination. Accomplishing that goal was worth it to Putin even though it would expose Russian intelligence efforts and make him and Russia look like a hypocrite in the Snowden case to anyone who was paying attention.

The crisis in Ukraine is ongoing with the USA Today reporting on Thursday that Ukraine protesters are telling reporters that they are concerned that Russia will intervene militarily at some point. I’ve heard this myself from several sources that the Russians are contemplating military intervention in Ukraine after the Olympics are over.

Again, this is a big issue to Russia and they are willing to pull out all the stops, all of the tricks and everything else to get their way here. What no one in the US or Europe should do is succumb to the dirty tricks that Russia and Putin are utilizing here to try and drive a wedge between the US and Europe. The US and Europe need to work together to ensure the wishes of the people of Ukraine to have closer ties to the EU are realized.


We’ll be right back.

[Tom Rinaldo]

33. The U.S. has had similiar impulses in our perceived "sphere of influence".

Think Cuba, think Chile, think Nicaragua etc. etc. etc.

[ChangeUp106]

7. Thom is an employee of RT

.

[truebrit71]

11. I believe he is self-employed. One of his shows airs on RT though...

...and I'm not sure what your point is?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

30. Thom makes money from RT. Pretty basic transaction.

He is aligning himself with a Russian propaganda mouthpiece. Sad, really.

[rusty fender]

36. Thom was interviewing Steve Cohen about

what is going on in Ukraine. Thom doesn't know what is going on so that is why he was interviewing a professor about the situation.

Thom hasn't "taken a side" in the situation; he hasn't "aligned" himself one way or another.

Prof. Cohen did say that the anti-Putinists want to stymie discussion by name calling and by declaring that anyone who isn't anti-Putin is anti-American.

[truebrit71]

44. ^^This^^

Interesting who easy it is for some to smear the reputation and ethics of one of the most progressive and intelligent voices* in the media today...

*On Edit: I am referring to Thom Hartmann, I do not know what Prof Cohen's politics are.

[quinnox]

8. don't know, and don't care

As always, I think it is none of "our" business (as in the USA).

[truebrit71]

12. And then there's this...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/29/ukraine-fascists-oligarchs-eu-nato-expansion

Which ties in more closely with the discussion I heard yesterday, and also points out that there are some VERY unsavoury characters involved in this "populist" revolt/protest...

[Are_grits_groceries]

13. Here is another view:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024532773

There are some very nasty RW groups pushing this. However, the ordinary citizens are very much involved.

[pampango]

14. You can safely say that there are "very unsavory characters" on both sides. Here's one very 'savory'

character on the protesters' side:

Death of a medic

A young medic who posted “I’m dying” on a networking site after being shot by the police, is reported to be among those killed in the clashes, the news site Interpret Mag reports.

Olesya Zhukovskaya, 21, was shot in the neck by a sniper, according to the protest group Euromaidan.

Her last post on the site Vkontakte read: “I’m dying”.

She was photographed clutching her neck as it bled onto her white coat emblazoned with a red cross. Her message appeared to have cross posted to Twitter.



I have seen reports that she is not dead. She had surgery and has survived, so that is good news.

[Are_grits_groceries]

15. Yes, I can say that.

There are violent RW groups who have been pushing for violence since this started. Some insist that they are the only ones protesting.

That medic is an example of the ordinary citizens who are protesting. I have been trying to get across the fact that there are many groups involved.

Right now it's the government vs everybody else.
You can't pick and choose your allies in times like this.

[TBF]

16. I can't blame the communists in

the country for not wanting EU/US austerity to come in ... but I also think it has gotten much more complicated than that initial split. I've seen videos indicating that many Ukranians weren't invested one way or another in the EU vs. Russia alignments, but are now really put off by the crackdowns that have come from their government.

Of course Putin has been aptly illustrating that he is pretty much a monster (gay rights, animal abuse amongst other issues) so Ukraine really does not have a great choice either way imo.

[laundry_queen]

19. That's exactly what I've heard from local Ukrainians

on a local radio show. It's not east vs west anymore, or EU vs Russia...now it's all about corruption, the violent crackdown and the lack of freedom to protest peacefully.

[d_r]

17. I think the opposition is a mishmash of groups

that have the basic solidarity of opposing the current regime.

This helped me think about it:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25182823

But one of the factions, Svoboda, is a far-right nationalist organization.

[Xithras]

18. I don't like toppling democratic governments over political disagreements.

The problem I have is that Ukraine is a democracy. A corrupt one to be sure, as most are to some degree or another, but the general consensus is that the elections weren't actually stolen. Some Ukrainians and Europeans even go as far as claiming that Ukraine is NOT a democracy, though their reasons for doing so would be a surprise to most Americans. According to the Ukrainian "pro-democracy" movement, having a PRESIDENT concentrates too much power into the hands of one person. The main Ukrainian pro-democracy group openly equates presidencies with autocratic dictatorships, and claims that only pure parliamentary systems are truly democratic. Under their definition, Obama is an autocratic dictator. I suspect that most of us here would oppose that definition.

The democratically elected non-military government made a decision that SOME of its citizens did not like, and those unhappy citizens responded by taking over government buildings and shutting down the capitol city for weeks. Keep in mind that polling confirms that a MINORITY of Ukrainians support the protesters. Only 30% of Ukrainians believe that the free trade agreements these protesters are fighting for will actually be beneficial to the Ukrainian people. Less than half supported its passage in the first place.

The government predictably responded with violence. Think about it...if Republicans forcefully took over government buildings in Washington DC and shut the city down for days on end because they opposed something that Obama did and accused him of being an autocratic dictator, how do you think WE would react? Would our law enforcement use violence to dislodge the protesters? Would Democrats support that violence? We ARE talking about the same situation...a political minority trying to force its will onto the majority, even though the minorities positions have been rejected through open and fair democratic processes.

Ukraine isn't a third world dictatorship that is arbitrarily passing laws to oppress its people. It is a free democracy in which the government made a decision that infuriated a minority of its people. There is NO QUESTION that some of the violence has gone well beyond what anyone would consider "acceptable", but that doesn't change the fact that we're talking about sanctioning and toppling a free and democratic government simply because we don't like one of its political decisions.

We're getting a heavily spun version of this in the west for two reasons. First, the EU isn't happy about losing access to the Ukrainian markets, and second because NATO wanted access to Ukraine to poke a stick in Putin's eye.

[Are_grits_groceries]

21. Yanukovich passed very restrictive laws.

http://en.ria.ru/world/20140117/186622165/US-Condemns-Ukraines-Anti-Protest-Laws-as-Undemocratic.html

He was elected democratically and immediately began to change whatever he could to remain in power.
Nobody likes bait and switch.

[Xithras]

24. The Ukrainian parliament wrote and passed the laws.

Yanukovich is an asshole, but he's not an autocrat or a dictator.

The Ukrainian parliament passed the laws after pro-free trade protesters shut down and occupied government buildings, built barricades across most of the capitols major roadways, and effectively shut down the capitol for weeks. Again, how would you feel if the REPUBLICANS were occupying federal government buildings by force, walking around armed and wearing body armor, blocking the major roadways in and out of the capitol, and shutting our government down?

The restrictive laws were unquestionably a poor response, but they weren't the trigger for the protests. They represent a failure of democracy, but the cure for bad democracy is MORE DEMOCRACY, not weapons and violence.

[Are_grits_groceries]

27. Oh yes those laws did spark protests.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/20/world/europe/in-ukraine-protests-over-new-laws-sticks-and-firecrackers-meet-tear-gas.html

The above is just one article citing the unrest that those laws caused.
And Yanukovich 's cronies have the majority in their parliament.

You act as if Ynukovich was surprised by them. He was in the thick of it.

[seveneyes]

23. That sounds about right

After watching some of the overly radical protesters throwing brand new tires with stickers still on them into burning fires in Kiev, I question their sanity and motives. I'm thinking we would not take too kindly to a bunch of people performing similar acts in DC. They need to put away their matches, tires and firework shells and take it to the table.

[Are_grits_groceries]

29. Well, you can't take it to a table when there isn't one. nt

[Pretzel_Warrior]

31. A Democracy? BAHAHAHAH! Easy to win when you throw your political rivals in prison

enough with the pro-Russain propaganda, ok? With prior president, Ukraine was DEMOCRATICALLY marching toward EU and NATO and some little SHIT named Putin wasn't having any of that.

For someone acting the expert, you sure aren't presenting the history very well.

[Xithras]

39. Who claimed to be an expert?

One does not need to be an expert in order to know how to read. You can listen to the protesters, or you can read the actual results of the actual elections and the actual international monitors who cleared it. The European OCSE oversaw the elections and has stated that the election was "high quality, transparent, and honest". Interestingly, they were there because both sides accused each other of vote rigging.

And Yulia Tymoshenko wasn't arrested until after the elections were over.

I'm not thrilled that Yanukovych came out victorious, but the downside of democracy is that you don't always win. When you lose, it means you need to work harder next time...not that you get to shut the country down until you can force the winner out.

Put your anti-Russian propaganda away. Destroying Ukraine to spite Russia is evil.

If you only support democracy when the vote goes your way, then you don't really support democracy at all.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

41. right. uh-huh.

[JVS]

45. +1

I think you're right on the money when you point out that it is a legitimate government and that the majority oppose the free trade agreement that these violent demonstrators support. I would also like to add another element that disturbs me. There is a tendency for the Western part of Ukraine to view themselves as the "real Ukraine" kind of how we have the red state "heartland" in the US. In contrast the Eastern areas of the country have long been an industrialized area that is multi-ethnic and not as nationalistic as the West. I cannot envision a way that the Western Ukrainians can maintain a democratic form of government against the wishes of the Eastern part without some kind of ethnic cleansing or altering the boundaries. So I really don't think that their movement can have a positive outcome.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

22. They're shooting people who aren't even armed

[Xithras]

25. Some of those people are armed.

Look at that first group carefully. Kevlar vests, shields, sharpened spikes, clubs, and I'm pretty damned sure that guy in front has a frigging SWORD in his hand. And they were advancing on police lines in a shielded military formation.

Not having guns does not make one "unarmed". A bat will kill as readily as a gun at close range, and those people were closing range quickly.

These aren't peaceful protests.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

26. I am glad they are not peaceful. Ukrainians don't fuck around

I want Ukrainian leader strung up from a flag pole. This government brutality is bullshit and you should be shamed and mocked for siding with tyrants.

[Comrade Grumpy]

42. These are not peaceful demonstrators.

The hard-core is right-wing fascists. That's who you're cheering on.

And you're calling for increased bloodshed. Sweet. You ought to get yourself over there right now and help save the glorious revolution.

[Are_grits_groceries]

28. Guns vs bricks, swords, catapults, etc.

The battle is joined now.
Do you honestly think snipers, live ammo, and such are the same as the protesters weapons?

The government began this violent push. They were goaded by RW crazies, but there are agent provocateurs hired by the government to commit acts of violence while appearing as protesters.

[Xithras]

32. I think...

...that if I have a gun in my hand, and you have a sword in yours, and you are walking toward me with your sword...I will shoot you.

They are the same in that they are both capable of killing. If someone tries to kill you with a knife, and you have a gun, you're not going to put your gun away and engage them in a knife fight.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

40. Let me guesss, they're also armed with a sidewalk. nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

43. They didn't kill those cops with flowers.