Should the United States be supporting the new government of Ukraine?

[another_liberal]

There has been spirited discussion on DU concerning recent events in Ukraine. A new government has come to power whose leading political party, called Svoboda, was described by a resolution adopted by the EU Parliament only fourteen months ago as being "Racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic." There is little doubt, in my opinion at least, that they have reneged on the internationally negotiated peace agreement of last Friday, and resorted to thoroughly undemocratic means to seize power.

http://www.ukrinform.ua/eng/news/european_parliament_urges_democratic_parties_against_cooperation_with_svoboda_294992

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7-TA-2012-0507+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN

My question is: Given the above described nature of this new government as well as our obvious domestic needs for any available cash, should we be giving aid to this new Ukrainian government?

11 votes, 2 passes | Time left: Time expired
	Yes we should give the new Ukrainian government our money.
	2 (18%)
	No we should not give the new Ukrainian government our money.
	6 (55%)
	I'm not sure if we should or shouldn't give the new Ukrainian government our money.
	3 (27%)
	2 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Comrade Grumpy]

1. Why wouldn't we support it? We helped make it happen.

What's a few neo-Nazis, anyway, when we get to poke the Russian bear?

[another_liberal]

2. It might also force Europe to buy its natural gas supplies from other sources . . .

Cutting Russia out of that lucrative market by blocking their existing pipeline system across Ukraine. There has to be a few tens of billions in that for Western energy corporations.

[dipsydoodle]

4. Were it able to do so

I think Europe would already be doing that. As it is if Putin turned off the gas to Europe, an unlikely event, then almost the whole of German industrial output would grind to halt in a matter of days.

You may also find the Germany gets Russian gas from Nord Stream : not Ukraine. Similarly when Sud Stream opens Ukraine will be bypassed anyway which will lose Ukraine its transit fees to Europe,

[another_liberal]

8. Thanks for that clarification.

The last I had heard, the "Nord Stream" was still uncompleted, due to Polish objections.

[dipsydoodle]

11. I got the impression it is

despite the US getting the oar in back in 2008.

The U.S. ambassador to Sweden, Michael Wood, in a comment in newspaper Svenska Dagbladet warns against the construction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline, saying that imported Russian gas is “a threat against Sweden”.

The article quickly triggered furore in the German government, a major stakeholder in the project. An official protest has now been sent by the Germans to U.S. authorities.

In his comment in Svenska Dagbladet, Ambassador Wood writes that “Europe should not become dependent of the unreliable Russia, which sows division between countries”.

The statement quickly spurred debate, both in Sweden and the other countries affected by the grand pipeline project, a joint initiative by Russian, German and Dutch energy companies.

According to German newspaper Handelsblatt, the German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier has sent an official protest to the U.S. embassy in Berlin where he expresses “major irritation” with the U.S. interference. Russian website Newsru.com writes that the pipeline project also is met by massive opposition from Polish authorities.

http://barentsobserver.com/en/node/21422

Just found this : Nord Stream Pipeline Load Test Completed.

The industry-standard test confirms the safety and reliability of the integrated twin-pipeline gas transportation system.

The completion of the NEL-Pipeline in early November allowed for a test phase involving the connected pipelines. Since the start of operations in November 2011, Nord Stream continues to transport all the gas nominated and supplied by Gazprom Export to its downstream European partners.

http://www.offshoreenergytoday.com/nord-stream-pipeline-load-test-completed/

Note also :

Nord Stream is scheduled to be completed in 2011 and to deliver the first gas after a test phase in the same year. Parts of the underwater pipeline will run through Finnish and Swedish territorial waters.

The reason Poland and Slovakia were against Nord Stream is that both get their gas from Ukraine and are acutely aware that their supply could be cut off without affecting Germany's supply.

[another_liberal]

12. So they went across the other side of the Baltic?

That was smart.

[dipsydoodle]

13. Hadn't followed it but take your word for it.

See also other bits I added above.

It will be Sud Stream which breaks Ukraine unless they smart.

[another_liberal]

15. I'm not an expert on the Nord Stream project, not by any means.

I do think your insight concerning the "Sud Stream" is, frankly, even more to the point as regards relations between Russia and Ukraine.

[FarCenter]

17. Two lines in operation -- 27.5 billion cubic metres (970 billion cubic feet) of gas annually each

Lines 3 and 4 are being planned to again double capacity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream

[okaawhatever]

32. Oh please, Nord Stream is Putin's way of controlling the countries it bypasses and giving himself a

way of sowing economic catastrophes in the future.

The parent company of Nord Stream was chartered in Switzerland for their secrecy laws. The Managing Director is Mathias Warning, a former Stasi officer who may have worked with Putin when Putin was KGB stationed in East Germany. The project was pushed through ten days before the German election by Shroeder. Immediately after Shroeder left office he took up a million dollar per year consultant gig for Nord Stream. The Prime Minister of Finland took a consulting post with Nord Stream as well. It's long been accepted in diplomatic circles that Shroeder gave Russia every bit of intel that the US and UK shared with him. (probably why Merkel's phone was bugged)

From Natural Gas Europe:
Russia's Gazprom holds 51% of Nord Stream, while German energy companies E.On Ruhrgas and Wintershall each hold 15.5%. Dutch company Nederlandse Gasunie and France's GDF Suez hold 9% each. Downstream from this gas supply, the price of which will be set by these players with no need to say who pays how much, except in carefully written corporate releases, the goal is value adding and supply to captive markets inside Europe, such as gas import dependent Britain which decided to exploit its North Sea reserves so fast the UK ran out of gas - fast.(Note: the purpose of this is to increase prices to the UK in addition to giving Putin the ability to cut off energy sources in the future)
__________

the entire project was corrupt, just like anything else that comes our of Putin's government. He's build 3 pipelines and they're all similar. This one has over 50 sub-companies under the parent company umbrella. All of which are chartered in countries with strict secrecy laws so no one knows how much money is going through them or who it goes to.


Yes, part of the pipeline's purpose is to by-pass countries like Ukraine so that Russia can cut them off without affecting supplies to Europe. Yes, part of the pipeline's purpose is to make Europe overly dependent on Russian gas. Putin wants Ukraine back. Not only do they need Ukraine's food to remain food independent they also are limited in the amount of oil and gas they can export without the pipelines through Ukraine. There's also no coincidence that Putin kept prices high in Ukraine until they needed relief and then offered it in exchange for signing a 25 year extension on Russia's naval base in Crimea. Putin's long term plans involve placing Europe in such an energy dependent state if he moves militarily they won't be effective in fighting back. Germany is already too dependent on Russia. I think that is why Angela Merkel made such a push towards renewable energy. There are many far right interests in Germany that want to align with Russia and are making big bucks with projects like these.

http://www.naturalgaseurope.com/germany-russia-energy-diplomacy

[El_Johns]

82. Russian gas lines to Europe via Ukraine

[geek tragedy]

61. Well, that and Putin's stooge was a corrupt murderer nt

[Blue_Tires]

89. We helped make Egypt happen, too

and you see the shitfest that happened when Morsi was elected and took the country five steps back...

[dipsydoodle]

3. I'm not sure anyone will GIVE them anything.

More likely buy bonds, secured against state assets , on which they will default and thus become western owned. At a future date articles will appear along the lines "woe is us" why were we not told of likely outcomes" including the onerous terms attached to IMF loans.

China has yet to step up to the plate - they already own 5% of Ukraine's farmland.

[another_liberal]

7. Five percent of agricultural land in the whole country?

That is astonishing.

My comments were in regard to news stories reporting that the EU, the US and the IMF had announced they would give Ukraine aid. I'm sure you are correct on precisely what forms that aid will take.

[dipsydoodle]

10. 5% of the country : 9% of arable farmland.

Actually on a 50 year lease.

[sabrina 1]

18. Thanks, which is why it was astounding to see support for the 'protesters' here.

If a country doesn't want to join the EU, airc, Britain is not a member, they should have the right not to be subjected to what other EU members have suffered over the past decade, Greece eg, which has had ITS national treasures sold to Private entities, and is hardly a sovereign state anymore.

I don't much about the Ukraine Govt on other issues, but I certainly saw their point regarding being forced into the EU considering what has happened to other 'lesser' members over there.

[dipsydoodle]

25. Britain is a member of the EU but not of the Euro.

Ukraine couldn't join the Euro come what may - the debt : GDP conditions are too strict and Ukraine currently verges on bankruptcy.

With regard to actual EU membership that would need the consent of ALL current members and it doesn't follow that all would agree. One single solitary no with exclude it - those are the rules and there are no appeals.

The protesters did have valid issues with their government but seem deprived of knowledge concerning the eventual likely outcome of their efforts. If their currency is devalued you will know the IMF got their way and whether they will actually be able to afford EU imports a matter of conjecture.

[sabrina 1]

28. Thanks for the correction on the UK.

It would be very surprising if their currency isn't devalued considering what has been going on over there over the past number of years.

I'm sure some of the protesters had legitimate issues, we all do with our own governments, but this was a coup and you have to wonder what the purpose of it was when all they had to do was wait for elections if the population was so opposed to the government. They would have had their way, wouldn't they? Or maybe not, maybe they feared that a majority of the people were not as opposed as they wanted the world to believe.

I have doubts that any government which is a result of an undermining of the Democratic Process will be much better than the one they overthrew for vast numbers of people. They rarely are. What has resulted from all this is to make a mockery of the Democratic Process. The country is now destabilized as a democracy.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

43. you need to educate yourself on the topic before spouting off

I love the rich hypocricy demostrated by "progressives" on DU.

[sabrina 1]

50. How about you 'educate' us on the subject being that you have such disdain

for the opinions of Progressives, no quotation marks. I'm listening ....

[another_liberal]

79. Some people can tolerate no alternate points of view.

I, for one, thank you for your well-reasoned comments.

[sabrina 1]

81. Thank you and I thank you for having the ability to state your opinion AND defend it

coherently. As you can see, I gave an opportunity to the commenter above to show his superior knowledge of a topic he claimed I am ignorant of. I am still waiting so I guess I will stick to my own 'uneducated' opinion after all.

Yes, some people do have serious problems allowing anyone to have a different opinion. This forum USED to be a lot more thoughtful, but that was a long time ago sadly.

[another_liberal]

78. That's kind of a rude tone to take with one of your fellow DU members.

Don't you think, or don't you?

[hrmjustin]

5. I think a wait and see approach is warrented.

[another_liberal]

9. That would be my preference also.

We may come to regret overly hasty support for this "Svoboda" group.

[dipsydoodle]

6. In the case of the UK

it will be a brave government which GIVES anything away given current issues here concerning flood relief schemes aside from other issues concerning expenditure.

[okaawhatever]

14. Your so called "poll: is a joke. Should we "give them our money". You also ignore the very serious

issues which face Ukraine, EU and us as a result. Availability of Gas and the pricing thereof. Russia's treatment of Ukraine. Russia needing Ukraine for food. Russia cutting off imports from companies who didn't support Russia's agenda. I could go on.....

[another_liberal]

16. You don't like it that passionately?

I am presenting the situation as I see it. If you disagree with my view, that is your prerogative, but I do resent your calling my efforts a "joke."

[Pretzel_Warrior]

45. it is a joke and you know it.

Svoboda? Yeah. they are the leading body in Ukraine politics? UH NO!!! Read a newspaper, for God's sake.

[muriel_volestrangler]

59. You are seriously misrepresenting the situation. The new president is not from Svoboda

Your OP is nothing to do with reality. You have not 'seen the situation'; you have made up your OP out of thin air.

Ukraine's new interim President, Olexandr Turchynov, is considered the right-hand man of Yulia Tymoshenko, the former prime minister imprisoned by President Viktor Yanukovych.

He is the first deputy leader of her Fatherland party, and his political career is closely intertwined with hers. Their co-operation stretches back to the mid-1990s.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26316268

Your poll is complete bollocks. If you leave it up, you are showing your true colours.

[another_liberal]

69. You're right that Turchynov is not of the party known as Svoboda, he is only closely allied with it.

As stated by a Scholar of Ukrainian politics interviewed on Democracy Now this morning (a man, by the way, who is currently in Ukraine and observing events there first hand):

Yes, it’s pretty much a classical coup, because under the current constitution the president may be—may resign or be impeached, but only after the case is reviewed by the Constitutional Court and then voted by a three-fourth majority of the Parliament. And then, either case, either the prime minister or the speaker of the Parliament must become the president. Instead, that’s not what happened at all. There was an extraordinary session of Parliament, after—it was held after most members were told there would be no session and many had left town. And then, under the chairmanship of the radical party, Svoboda, this rump Parliament declared that the president had self-removed himself from the presidency.

. . .

There is a parliamentary party now, which could be called a right-wing party, and that is the Svoboda party. They’re the ones who, as I mentioned, convened the extraordinary session of Parliament that led to the ouster of the president. Now, how to exactly describe them, I will leave that to Professor Snyder. But I would simply note that there was an EU Parliament resolution of December 13, 2012, that drew attention specifically to the Svoboda party and called it racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic. Now, compared to Svoboda, the Right Sector, which has been active in all of the violence in the streets, is more radical, more militarily organized and more willing to use violence.

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/2/24/a_coup_or_a_revolution_ukraine

I expect a prompt apology for your unwarranted and hurtful remarks.

[muriel_volestrangler]

70. My remarks are highly warranted; you continue to get things wrong

That saying nothing about 'closely allied', as you know very well. The next speaker says "They’re less significant than the far right in France. They’re less significant than the far right in the Netherlands. " This shows your "A new government has come to power whose leading political party, called Svoboda ..." is bullshit. And you know it. You're making things up.

Petro, however, is being misleading himself. He claims "under the chairmanship of the radical party, Svoboda, this rump Parliament declared that the president had self-removed himself from the presidency". But that's wrong; the chairman of the parliament was Volodymyr Rybak, of the Party of the Regions, until Saturday morning; he was succeeded by Turchynov, of Fatherland.

[another_liberal]

71. A greater expert on Ukrainian politics . . .

Are you trying to claim you are a more knowledgable expert on Ukrainian politics than a Fulbright research scholar who is specializing in that topic?

No offense intended, muriel, but where do you get off saying that I'm "making things up?"

[muriel_volestrangler]

72. I quoted what you had made up - the "leading political party" BS

It's false, and you know it's false. And it's the central claim of your OP, and thus the whole thing is built on misleading DUers. As far as that Fulbright scholar goes, I'm quoting press reports. The chairmanship of the parliament passed from the Party of Regions to Fatherland. He seems to be the only person claiming Svoboda involvement in chairing the parliament.

[another_liberal]

73. No, he is not the only one suggesting that.

Believe what you want, but my advice would be to consult a wider range of sources. You might find it broadens your perspective.

BTW: Don't tell me what I do or don't know, or what I do or don't mean by what I say. I'll cover that side of the street myself.

[muriel_volestrangler]

74. While you spout misleading BS, it's important to point out you're wrong

So I will continue to do so.

[another_liberal]

75. When one side of a debate starts to resort to personal attacks.

The opposing side of the debate has won.

Thanks for playing.

[muriel_volestrangler]

76. I'm attacking your posts

They are not people.

[dipsydoodle]

19. "Us ?" - wasn't aware the US bought Russian gas

Russia cutting off imports ........much of Ukraine's industrial output from east Ukraine is only exported to Russia for perfectly sound reasons. There are currently no replacement markets for those goods : certainly not the EU. If Ukraine does enter into an agreement with the EU it is considered possible that Russia will actually seal the border.

[okaawhatever]

34. Ukraine's imports and exports with Russia are almost equal. If russia stopped buying Ukraine's

imports and Ukriane stopped buying Russia's imports the difference would roughly be zero. The question is if Ukraine could find some other countries to trade with.

The trade pact with the EU doesn't mean that no trade deal will be signed. The President was substituting one trade deal with another. Both deals must be looked at and compared. Russia has cut off imports from Ukraine to gain political leverage. Russia has not been a fair trade partner for Ukraine. Any potential trade deal must be looked at for the benefit of the country. All you've done is criticize the EU deal. where are your comparisons to what Ukraine gets from Russia?

[dipsydoodle]

36. I'll leave you to search for the reason

why there are no substitute markets for the industrial goods currently exported to Russia. The only alternative according to what you wrote would be a preposition.

You will also find elsewhere that the EU provided no guarantees as to how much they would import from the Ukraine - the EU's concern is how they can export there which conveniently ignores the fact that Ukraine would need to borrow foreign reserves to service the imbalance.

Russia cut off imports from Ukraine when ?

What Ukraine gets from Russia is the status quo whereas the long term cost of the EU deal is anticipated to be a downside of $220 billion to fund which is equal to the entire bailout of Greece.

For above reference see here : It remains unclear how much the EU, which has said it will not join a bidding war for Ukraine, is willing to offer. Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov estimates the country would need 160 billion euros ($220 billion) to adapt to the free-trade zone proposed by the European Union. http://news.yahoo.com/spurned-president-eu-embraces-ukraine-protest-080514974--finance.html

[okaawhatever]

54. Cutting off imports:

KIEV, Ukraine — From the Baltic to the Black Sea, a chocolate wall has descended across the continent of Europe.
Related

Russia Putting a Strong Arm on Neighbors (October 23, 2013)

The New York Times
The output of the sprawling brick factory, formerly known as the Karl Marx chocolate works, has never before been so hard to sell in Russia. Since July, when Russian regulators banned all chocolate, cake, cookie and candy imports from its Ukrainian parent company, Roshen, ostensibly over health concerns, production at the plant here has plummeted 14 percent.

SNIP

“It’s not pleasant at all to be in this situation,” Viacheslav Moskalevskyi, the president of Roshen, Ukraine’s largest confectionery company, said in an interview.

Ukraine and Moldova must decide by a Nov. 28-29 summit meeting in Vilnius, Lithuania, whether to sign the Association Agreement.

And Russia is willing to play rough to ensure that does not happen. Russia banned wine from Moldova. This fall, after Russia banned milk imports from Lithuania as part of a struggle for economic influence, yogurt and kefir piled up at checkpoints. Lithuania is already in the European Union, but the Kremlin restricted dairy imports anyway, apparently in anger that the former client state was being a strong advocate of bringing in the other former Soviet states.

When Lithuanian authorities said they might complain to the World Trade Organization, Russia’s former chief sanitary inspector, Gennady Onischenko, replied that if that happened, the restrictions would remain in place “for an incredibly long time.” Members of the European Parliament expressed their solidarity with Lithuania by eating a type of Lithuanian sweetened cottage cheese dessert in front of photographers, but the economic dividing line in Europe is hardening.

And all of Ukraine is stuck in the same sticky box. Moody’s, the bond rating agency, downgraded Ukraine’s sovereign debt rating last month, in part over concerns the country will not obtain a gas price discount from Russia while this trade war persists. Ukraine’s economy contracted in the first half of 2013.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/30/business/international/ukrainian-chocolates-caught-in-trade-war-between-europe-and-russia.html

The day after the Ukraine President announced rejecting the EU deal and was signing w/Russia this ban was lifted.


Russia bans two Ukraine meat firms, as meat war threatens
By Vladislav Vorotnikov, 14-Nov-2013
Russian veterinary service Rosselkhoznadzor has banned meat imports from two Ukrainian companies in the first step of a possible meat war that could seriously damage the Ukrainian industry.
http://www.globalmeatnews.com/Industry-Markets/Russia-bans-two-Ukraine-meat-firms-as-meat-war-threatens

These are just a couple of instances. Russia has been using imports bans as a political tool for some time. Notice the ramp up in bans that preceeded the President's decision to not pursue EU membership.

[sabrina 1]

21. Do you support forcing a country into the EU if they believe it will not benefit them?

What do you think of the Austerity programs inflicted on EU countries, most of whom are impoverished and now beholden to the IMF and World Bank, once first world countries, now reduced to the status of Third World countries?

Ireland, eg, now under the draconian policies of the IMF. Should the Ukraine be forced into the same situation IF they do not want it?

[FarCenter]

20. What "new government"? Elections are scheduled for May.

Members of Parliament have not changed yet.

[sabrina 1]

22. What if the new government agrees with the duly elected leaders now overthrown in a

coup, that joining the EU will not benefit the Ukraine? Will that government also be overthrown?

[okaawhatever]

39. You keep remarking that the citizens of Ukraine didn't want an EU deal. That simply isn't true. They

elected someone who campaigned on trade with the EU. The protests began when he did an about face on that and instead announced an agreement with Russia without public input. Russian Ukranians only make up about 18% of the population, and many of them don't even speak Ukranian. The former President hardly spoke Ukranian when he took office. Not to mention Yanukovych's other "deals" with Russia like extending the lease for the Russian Navy Black Sea port at Sevastopol for 25 years.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

47. people are deeply invested in the propaganda fed to them by Greenwald and company

and will not let facts get in the way of their pre-digested opinions spoon fed to them by Libertarian/"progressive leading lights.

[okaawhatever]

57. No kidding. It amazes me what I'm learning abut some of these people Defending Putin's tactics is a

tough sell. I'm surprised at how many here are managing to be anti-EU in all of this. I guess when you read news sources like RT it helps.

[Comrade Grumpy]

99. Did I miss something? What does Greenwald have to do with this?

[sabrina 1]

52. They elected him, didn't they? And if they didn't like his policies, who does after

all the campaign promises turn to something else, they had the ability to elect someone else. A coup destabilizes and delegitimizes claimed democracy. Do you think this is the way to show disagreement with elected officials in a democracy and how legitimate will his replacement be after such a display of anti-democracy?

I find it hard to believe that anyone here would support the overthrow of an elected official over policy disagreements. But there is a lot I'm having trouble understanding lately regarding the changing positions of the 'left' in THIS country.

[okaawhatever]

55. It wasn't a policy disagreement. It was a wholesale change in the future of the country. It's not

like the President decided to not make a holiday official. Give me a break. Please research Russia's influence on this President before you continue these assumptions. You may also notice that one of the reasons for the President's rejection of the EU was their insistence that a political prisoner and his primary opponent be released from prison. The EU noted a remarkable decline in the democratic process in the country. Reporters without borders and The Transparency Project had downgraded the country steadily during the President's reign. There were many issues, please spend some time reviewing what the President did to his people.

And it wasn't a government coup. It started out as a protest. Had the President not responded by passing harsh anti-protest measures it likely wouldn't have escalated.

[sabrina 1]

58. None of that explains why the election could not have been used to oust him.

Whenever something like this happens it leads to questions as to whether there is fear that the people themselves may not agree with the 'protesters'. Were they afraid he would be elected again? If all they are claiming is true, then they should not have had a problem with a democratic process. Airc, he had agreed to an early election.

And why are WE so invested in these countries, condemning their leaders for things that PALE by comparison to some of those we are supporting with MONEY. Karamov eg, where are the protests here on DU against OUR Government financing this genocidal, torturing dictator?

Seems to me anyone who is angry over the Ukraine, should be on FIRE with anger over Uzbekistan. Makes one think our 'issue of the day' is being driven by entities with a vested interest in the outcomes. While we look the other way from far more egregious violations by some of our allies.

[okaawhatever]

60. The President was elected as a pro-EU candidate. He continued to pursue a path to EU membership

until an abrupt about face. By the time they would have reelected someone else it would have been to late. There were other actions by the President that made people suspicious, but this was the last straw.

When the people of Uzbekistan are in the street finally ready to confront their government we'll help. Until then it's hard to motivate an entire country to help themselves. We have protested their human rights record.

[sabrina 1]

65. Obama was elected as a pro-Public Option candidate, anti Insurance Mandate but then

did an about face. So you ARE advocating ousting elected officials on policy issues rather than voting them out then? Okay, I found that hard to believe but if that is the new position of the 'left' here, I'm glad to learn about it now rather than later.

It's too late for those of us who will not benefit from Mandated Insurance, but that is the price of democracy, we will have to wait for another opportunity to try to end it and get a real Health Care system in place where people are not punished for not being able to afford it. But in my wildest dreams I can't imagine overturning by violence, any elected official, even Bush, based on 'we didn't get what we wanted so we're going to throw a temper tantrum, and TAKE what we want'. That never works out well either.

[okaawhatever]

68. Absolute friggin' bulls%T. Obama DID NOT RUN ON SINGLE PAYER OPTION!!!!!!! He long said

he was a fan of single payer but with the system we have in place it would be too difficult to make the switch. Your comparisons are just desperate.

What's most concerning in all this is your absolute refusal to investigate these matters. I hope you'll take the time to research Yanukovich's history. I doubt you will beause it's been years and you haven't researched the single payer issue, but that's up to you. I have read at least 15 articles and 5 academic papers on Yanukovich looking especially for the ones published before the current crisis. I find that reporting during a crisis one tends to find more bias.

From Politifact:

In February 2004, about a month before the primary election in the U.S. Senate race, the Associated Press reported the stance of all the candidates on universal health care. "Obama says he supports the idea of universal health care but does not think a single-payer government system is feasible. He says the government should be the health care provider of last resort for the uninsured." In a rundown of all the candidates' positions, the Associated Press summarized Obama's position as "Support, but 'probably not at this stage,' a single-payer government system."

In his book The Audacity of Hope , published in October 2006 when he was a U.S. senator, Obama described single-payer as the hope of the left, while those on the right wanted a market-based approach. "It's time we broke this impasse by acknowledging a few simple truths," Obama wrote, suggesting a system much like the one he supports today.

In April 2007, a few months after he declared his candidacy for presidency, the Chicago Tribune reported, "Obama has pledged that, if elected, all Americans would have health-care coverage by the end of his first term. He has said he is reluctant to switch to a 'single-payer' national health insurance system because of the difficulty in making a quick transition from the employer-based private system."
At his town halls as president, he routinely answers questions about single-payer by saying he would favor it if he were starting a system "from scratch." But he consistently adds that's not the goal of the current reform. "For us to transition completely from an employer-based system of private insurance to a single-payer system could be hugely disruptive, and my attitude has been that we should be able to find a way to create a uniquely American solution to this problem that controls costs but preserves the innovation that is introduced in part with a free-market system," Obama said in Annandale, Va., on July 1, 2009.

[JVS]

83. You're not addressing what Sabrina said. Obama did indeed run against the individual mandate and...

for the public option.

[geek tragedy]

62. If they are as corrupt and murderous as that thug who just got removed, yes.

Boo hoo that the criminal murdering kleptocrat got replaced.

Getting elected does not entitle someone to rule as a dictator.

[sabrina 1]

67. Yay for Coup D'etats. Thanks, that's what I was trying to find out about this 'new left'

we are seeing here lately. Overturn elections in democracies with violent coups d'etats.

[another_liberal]

23. They are certainly acting like a government . . .

Although only a little over half of the elected Rada representatives dare to even be seen in Kiev. Have you watched the videos of what happened to members of Yanukovich's ruling majority coalition at the hands of right wing protesters last Friday and Saturday? It's pretty disturbing stuff, my friend.

[dipsydoodle]

26. Their "new government"

isn't even legal under their own constitution.

[bemildred]

35. Thank you. nt

[Blue_In_AK]

24. No.

Just because one government gets overthrown doesn't necessarily mean the next one will be better. Not to go all Godwin, but remember Hitler?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

48. why admit you're undercutting your argument by bringing up Hitler and then bring up Hitler?

to each his own.

[Blue_In_AK]

51. My point being that some people in America were all enamored with Mr. Hitler

when he first came to power. That didn't work out so well.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

53. People get enamoured with any number of people.

I don't see how making a direct comparison to Hitler works.

[Blue_In_AK]

56. I give up.

You guys are right. Fuck me.

[sadoldgirl]

27. The whole question of the Ukraine is far from settled

It seems that the country is split, eastern part vs western part. It is a very old split, even as far as religion is concerned. May be they will split, which would upset Putin terribly. This may take a long time to develop, I just hope that it does so peacefully.

[sabrina 1]

30. Why do you think a split would upset Putin? Seriously, I don't know

how it would affect Russia. I do know it would probably upset the World Bank and the IMF if half the country refused to be beholden to them as has happened to most EU countries not part of the 'ruling class' over there.

Can you explain why Russia would be negatively affected by a split in the Ukraine?

[sadoldgirl]

33. I have met not only people from both sides in the Ukaraine,

but also quite a number of russians. The russians claim that it is old Rus, they consider the country as their own or one that they originally came from. Putin has worked his tail off to keep it under russian control.
Remember Gorbacheva? She said quite emphatically: "Ukraine, but that is us!" Not only economics, but also history play a huge role here. Just from talking to my former coworkers, who came from there I got these impressions.

[dipsydoodle]

31. Don't think that would miff Putin.

Might even be the best possible result given current circumstances.

East would thrive while the west went skint and then the east could buy the west and it would all be one again.

[pampango]

29. I would not give them money, but we (along with others) should certainly help them.

As far as I know, they haven't requested gifts - although I suppose few of us turn down gifts if they are offered - but loans.

I do now know that the far right will emerge as the leaders in the new government. That is certainly something to keep an eye on and react strongly to if it happens. In general I think the way to keep the far right out of power is not to foster economic chaos, but to provide (along with others) help to get things moving in a positive direction. I think the far right benefits more from economic chaos than the left does.

And, in general, I think those who support help for our own needy also support help for needy in other countries. The tea party types are notorious for opposing foreign aid and they oppose domestic safety net programs as well.

[bigwillq]

37. We need to stop giving other countries money (nt)

[Tommy_Carcetti]

38. The interim President is not a member of Svoboda. Svoboda is far from a majority in the Rada.

Neither of the two individuals most frequently mentioned as front runners for the Presidency--Yulia Tymoshenko and Vitali Klitschko--are members of Svoboda.

Yanukovych's own ruling party has denounced him.

Will you please stop pushing the narrative that it was the far-right that was pushing the protests and the change in power? This was a transcending movement.

Svoboda represents roughly 8% of the Rada. Just as a comparison, 11% of U.S. House Members identify themselves as members of the Tea Party Caucus.

A breakdown of the Rada:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verkhovna_Rada

[okaawhatever]

40. thank you. I read earlier that Yulia said she wouldn't run. I think that's a good idea since she

seems to have problems with diplomacy and compromise. I'm unfamiliar with the boxer's politics but I hope he has a good platform.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

42. I agree re Yulia.

While she's far from the worst thing for Ukraine, she's a bit of a lightning rod. And her squabbling with Yuschenko back in 2010 was one of the main reasons why Yanukovych was able to take the presidency.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

49. really sad to see the lies being pushed about Ukrainian protests on this site

thank you for being a voice of facts, truth, and reason amidst the anti-American/anti-EU din

[okaawhatever]

80. Thanks. I began reading up on the situation and learned of some of the neo-cons and right wingers

that were brought in to help Yanukovych. It really surprised me. The law firm hired goes back to the Reagan administration and defended Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen. Here's an interesting article on the matter.

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/us-firms-hired-for-probe-67370.html

[librechik]

41. of course we have to support the interim govt, when it arrives. provisionally.

It's an emergency. But we have to be careful about the new regime after the election, assuming it happens.

[another_liberal]

93. I did not support the government a violent coup installed in Egypt, and I still don't.

I do not support the government a violent coup installed in Ukraine, and I doubt I ever will.

[librechik]

94. so ...you would be opposed to the bloody War of Independence, I gather

must be nice to have everything all black and white like that.

[another_liberal]

95. Was King George III democratically elected?

If I'm not mistaken, the Thirteen Colonies weren't even allowed to vote representatives into the House of Commons, right?

[librechik]

96. so... it's not the bloodiness you are objecting to, but the lack of democracy?

Tell me when the Ukrainians had a chance to elect a government in the last 3 days. They didn't? Well cut those fuckers off!

BTW, I'm pretty sure the dictator who just flew the coop as it were was democratically elected. it was the subsequent corruption that was unacceptable to the people.

I really am not getting your point. They need help. and if we don't offer it, they'll get it from Russia or China. How is that good for us?

[muriel_volestrangler]

44. I think your poll and OP are highly misleading

Svoboda is not the "leading political party". It has 36 seats out of 450 in the parliament: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svoboda_%28political_party%29 . Tymoshenko's has 88: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-Ukrainian_Union_%22Fatherland%22 . Klitschko's has 42: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Democratic_Alliance_for_Reform . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verkhovna_Rada .

Svoboda are not 'the new government'. They do not lead it. Your OP is highly misleading. The only honest thing to do would be to self-delete, check your facts, and start again.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

46. Unless the OP has an agenda to push.....nt

[another_liberal]

86. Is opposition to violent overthrow of democratically elected governments . . .

Is opposition to the violent overthrow of democratically elected governments an "agenda?"

If so, then you may have a point there.

[another_liberal]

87. Your opinion.

(sigh)

[LittleBlue]

63. I give the new government in Ukraine 2 months max

It makes the old Egyptian transitional government look stable by comparison.

I think Putin will just back off and watch it implode. There are serious divisions in the resistance.

[another_liberal]

90. I have to agree.

Putin should just stand back and watch for the looks on the coup leaders' faces when they learn the conditions IMF and EU support will come with.

[KittyWampus]

64. I am not sure and am trying to grasp the reality of the situation as best I can.

[another_liberal]

92. Don't feel alone . . .

We all are doing much the same.

Most of us are, at least.

[DevonRex]

66. A. Pushing Russian propaganda. B. What government?

C. Maybe. The British are.

[another_liberal]

77. The European Union Parliament . . .

Are you trying to accuse the European Union Parliament of "Pushing Russian propaganda?"

[muriel_volestrangler]

84. EU prepared to support Ukrainian reforms with 20 billion euros

The European Union is prepared to support Ukrainian reforms with 20 billion euros after the country forms its new government, European Parliament Foreign Affairs Committee President Elmar Brok said.

He told the 1+1 channel on Sunday evening he believed that 20 billion euros would be on the table to back the reforms and the support could be granted immediately to prevent Ukraine's default.

The European Parliament deputy expressed hope for the soonest possible formation of a new Ukrainian government, which would carry out the reforms.

He promised the EU support for the new government and told Ukrainians they needed not to be afraid of default or that a lack of support would prevent the reforms.

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/eu-prepared-to-support-ukrainian-reforms-with-20-billion-euros-337471.html

You posted something from over a year ago, just one part of which was saying "don't ally with Svoboda". Let's look at some of the other stuff it said, remembering there had just been an election, with the coalition led by Yanukovych's Party of Regions in charge:

1. Expresses regret at the fact that, according to the OSCE, PACE, NATO Parliamentary Assembly and European Parliament observers, the electoral campaign, electoral process and post-electoral process failed to meet major international standards and constitute a step backwards compared with the national elections in 2010;

2. Notes, in particular, that certain aspects of the pre-election period (the arrest of opposition political leaders, the lack of a level playing field, caused primarily by the misuse of administrative resources, cases of harassment and intimidation of candidates and electoral staff, a lack of transparency in campaign and party financing, and a lack of balanced media coverage) and the irregularities and delays in the vote count and tabulation process constituted a step backwards compared with recent national elections;

3. Stresses that the fact that two leaders of the opposition, Yulia Tymoshenko and Yuri Lutsenko, and others were held in jail during the elections adversely affected the electoral process;
...
8. Is concerned about the rising nationalistic sentiment in Ukraine, expressed in support for the Svoboda Party, which, as a result, is one of the two new parties to enter the Verkhovna Rada; recalls that racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic views go against the EU's fundamental values and principles and therefore appeals to pro-democratic parties in the Verkhovna Rada not to associate with, endorse or form coalitions with this party;
...
13. Calls on Ukraine to end the selective application of justice in Ukraine at all levels of government and to make it possible for opposition parties to participate in political life on the basis of a level playing field; calls on the authorities, in this context, to free and rehabilitate politically persecuted opponents, including Yulia Tymoshenko, Yuri Lutsenko and others;

There's a lot more there about the old government running dodgy elections and jailing opponents than the warning about not allying with Svoboda. And we see that the EU parliament is now supporting a new government.

[another_liberal]

85. The top EU leadership does seem to be supporting this new Ukrainian government, for now.

I have not, however, seen anything about the EU Parliament voting to do so yet, have you?

That being said, of course, who knows what tomorrow may bring?

[Blue_Tires]

88. Wait and see

Let the dust settle, see who's in charge and how they are running things, and then decide...

[another_liberal]

91. Sage advice.

We have much more important domestic needs to spend our limited money on anyway.

[Adrahil]

97. Heh.... no agenda here, eh?

What is up with all Kremlin apologists here?

[another_liberal]

103. What "Kremlin appologists?" I ain't seen none round here.

This is the Democratic Underground.

[WatermelonRat]

98. Depends on extensively you define "support"

I wouldn't be opposed to extending some humanitarian aid while the country get's back on its feet and sorts things out, but I'd be against major, long term funding.

[another_liberal]

102. I agree, humanitarian aid is fully warranted and, most likely, badly needed.

We should be careful who that humanitarian aid is delivered to though. It can easily be sold on the black market to enrich people so criminal and corrupt they make Yanukovich look tame by comparison.

[Comrade Grumpy]

100. What government? There doesn't seem to be one there.

Seems like the only people organized are the street toughs.

[another_liberal]

101. I'm afraid that does seem to be the lay of the land.

Somebody did manage to seize power and drive off the democratically elected President and ruling majority in the Parliament. What kind of a government they actually constitute, and where their authority comes from (other than violent street demonstrations and Molotov cocktails, of course) is anyone's guess.