I keep going back to what an instructor who once was in the arena told us many years ago (Ukraine) [View all]

[nadinbrzezinski]

International relations is a bunch of sons of bitches advancing national interests. (He was in his late 60s back in 1983 so we can forgive him for not mentioning women) Among other things he was a CIA operator and an AF Intel officer. So given he did the dirty work, I think we can take his experience for something.

As to PNAC, I don't care how many times McCain goes to places abroad for photo ops (and one of these days he will be shot and killed if he keeps this up, leading to a huge international incident, but that is the extent of the influence). The fact that you have McCain doing these things from the outside tells you how weak the PNAC boys have become, and to a point irrelevant.

Again, I go back to my professor.

Who is involved?

NATO and the EU. Why, they want secure borders on the East and the most they would do is allow Poland and Rumania in, why? They push any further east... and they knew it. Ukraine actually applied at one point and received a stern no. And Russia has been paranoid ever since. There is more to it, but that is the main objective, security.

The EU wants Ukraine for the same reason Putin wants Ukraine, the industrial East and the Agricultural west, there is a reason they are called the bread basket of Russia. The industrial East is closer to Reagan Democrats (and I am using that analogy becuase it sort of fits, because it really does not, but will make sense to Americans), who voted for Yanukovich who ran a nationalist, resurgent Ukraine campaign. Think again, it barely fits but it is understandable from an American perspective, a morning in America campaign. Add to that his agreements with Russia to get interest free loans to stabilize the economy, and his Ethnic Russian base, and that is the proximate origin of the crisis.

The majority of the population to the West, thought Yanukovich was forcing them to the arms of Russia, which for very local historical reasons they feared. The most recent of those was the destruction of the Kulaks in the 1930s. Yes, Nuland was there, distributing cookies at the square, but that was the State Department taking advantage, we did not push that. Once it developed, we encouraged it, why? See the first line, you have plenty of sons of bitches advancing national interests, and it is not in the interests of the US, or Germany for that matter, to see a resurgent Russia. So that is not about IMF or European bankers, it is simply containment of a resurgent Russia. The Bankers and the IMF are taking advantage of it, but they are not the main reason we encouraged Maidan square, we did not cause it. Don't get me wrong, the interests of the banks are somewhere up there, but not the main reason. Truly containment is the real reason. Russia is going for try number three at Empire...and the West really does not want that. The other two were ghastly and costly.

Now look at Russia, Putin has made several statements that point straight to that resurgent Russia. The dissolution of the USSR was a mistake, Kiev is the mother of all Russian Cities, and the latest is the use of the term New Russia. The first one is more modern, and to be honest, he believes that. The other two have long roots, and mean he intends to take the whole Ukraine. That is his intent. See what I said about sons of bitches advancing national interests. It is in his national interest to have a warm water port, and an industrial zone to rearm the armed forces. Some of the cities in the East were closed during the cold war and all they produced was weapons. They also saw zero unemployment, and very healthy pensions. So a lot of the folks, especially older ones, remember that, and Putin playing on that has promised to raise pensions. He is also playing on rank nationalism and minorities still matter a lot more in Europe than in the US, because these are not multicultural nations for the most part. So ethnic hates and distrusts are just part of the witches brew.

Other forces at play are yes, your antisemitic groups and those are not just Sbvoboda, though it is frightening they were given positions in national security, they have had what four defense ministers so far and three internal security? This story from China actually illuminates the issues for the cabinet quite well

The new Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk, a 39-year-old former banker and diplomat, is expected to pay special attention to Ukraine's economy and foreign policy.

Although it is widely believed that Yatsenyuk, who was one of the prominent figures in Ukraine's pro-European protests, would concentrate government efforts towards the accession to the 28- member European Union, some analysts say the new PM would most likely develop balanced foreign policy.

While in service as the country's foreign minister in 2007, Yatsenyuk has maintained good diplomatic relations with both Eastern and Western partners.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2014-03/01/c_126206979.htm

And I find this particularly interesting, and I am going to Xinxua because they as of yet do not have a dog in this fight. So for the moment, they are a tad more neutral as far as a new service is concerned. I wonder where Beijing is on this one? What are their national interests? I guess seeing the West bleed itself white, with Russia would be perfectly acceptable. I mean, this is how the US became an Empire... and why we emerged in 1945 as such.

And this from the Guardian is particularly interesting

The Kremlin describes last month's uprising in next-door Ukraine as an illegitimate fascist coup. It says dark rightwing forces have taken over the government, forcing Moscow to "protect" Ukraine's ethnic Russian minority. The local government in Crimea is preparing for a referendum on Sunday which could lead to Russia annexing the region. Yanukovych, meanwhile, has fled to Russia.

Schilling, however, was an unlikely fascist. A father of two daughters, he and his wife Anna had lived in Italy. They had four grandchildren. Moreover, he was Jewish.


With Ukraine on the brink of invasion and division, most people in Kiev blame the country's troubles on the former president. "This is Yanukovych's fault," Zhenia, a pensioner, said, surveying the battleground in Institutska Street, where many were gunned down. She was crying.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/13/ukraine-uprising-fascist-coup-grassroots-movement

Do we have fascists? Likely, but not just in the Western part of the Country. What we have though, everywhere, are hard core nationalists, who want to bring the nation back to what it was once. A few have even talked of Kievan Rus, which incidentally so does the Kremlin. But the vision of how to do that is different for each region of Ukraine.

As to the US actually going to an armed conflict. Nope, it ain't gonna happen. It is not in our national interest to do such. Why? We are tired from ten years of war, and quite frankly can't afford it. If we end up in another European war, like WW I and II, it will be kicking and screaming (though you can make more of a case for the US entering WW II on purpose)For the record, the Kremlin can do math too, and they know this.

As to Americans being played by these powerful forces? Yes and no. Some of this governments do on purpose. A lot of it, they stumble like old blind men, into situations they cannot handle. And my evidence as to why we are not going to play more than a war of words if we can avoid it... the US propaganda on all this has been pretty soft, nothing like before the war in Iraq for example. There are no claims of mushroom clouds or anything like that.

What this is doing though is releasing a lot of fears and a lot of questions as well as other things in the Far East, not just Ukraine. And Austerity is doing something else, it is releasing the poison of RW thinking all over Europe, including France. And that is not because these evil people want a war. The Austrian School of Economics, as well as the Chicago School of Economics are almost religions, and a core principle of faith is that social nets don't work.

Ironically they were both a reaction to the USSR, and garble bargle Communism, and they have not evolved with the times. After all Russian has cut down their own safety nets to the bone and then some, and has also seen a rise of nationalism not seen in a while, as well as a local oligarchy.

Some folks asked for the nuance, you got it. And this is what I have been trying to point out all along. It is not just one thing behind this, As to the blind men stumbling into situations, read the beginning of the Guns of August by Barbra Tuchman. Her description of how Europe stumbled onto WW I is precious, and quite accurate.

But there are two things to remember, all nations pursue their own national interests, aways. and yes, war is the pursuit of politics by another name. That said, do we have an Oligarchy in the US? Yes. The least thing they want is a world war. It really is bad for business, and at times it sets the ground for the little people to wake up and taken them down like cheap dolls. Americans might not remember 1917, but they do.

Incidentally, this is a cliff's notes, since we could all write long books, treatises even, on this.