Ukraine Background: Conspiracies or Puppets [Vanity]

Interesting research...although it is fact, not conspiracy, that George Soros backs the protestors in Ukraine. Also, the liberal media in the US did not focus on Ukraine until Russia passed its Homosexual Laws.

Scary how involved the US taxpayer funded USAID is involved in Ukraine.

Yes, Soros was operating there, but so were other Western NGOs. I wanted to point out the others.

You’ll note the NGO section. I was specifically looking for NGO activity that was not Soros, as some folks immediately dismiss everything you’re saying as “conspiracy theory” the first time you mention Soros.

I mentioned Soros only once, when I observed that Akhmetov has his own foundation that is based on the Western model - which is to say that the Akhmetov foundation is a foundation on its own, deriving its funding from Akhmetov, but just seems to be modeled on what everyone else is doing.

Akhmetovs foundation looks like, IMHO, it serves really two purposes: a) being a place for Akhmetov to actually give a little bit to charities (it’s his own so he controls where the money is spent) and b) it gives him good PR inside Ukraine.

IMHO, Akhmetov simply was getting in on the foundation scheme, not to be caught doing nothing in that regard, which would potentially set his own company and wealth to be quietly attacked / undermined for not being “charitable”. I also point out the relationship his SCM has with USAID, winning those awards. He’s been hedging his bets all along, getting to know the Westerners, doing business with them their way. So he picks the issues he likes and sets up his own NGO shop like they do. Of course, the whole new world order agenda is the agenda of the top foundations like Ford Foundation (links to CIA, don’t forget), but in a country like Ukraine they’re not ready to embrace sodomy yet. So they approach people with caring for orphans, etc. Once Ukraine signs the EU agreement, then all the EU requirements and agendas (like green energy) instantly take effect inside Ukraine, which will begin the march towards full compliance.

His foundation would not have to really work towards undermining the Ukrainian government, since it already pretty much reports to him. That would be like the foundations of the US trying to topple the US government - that would be backwards, since it’s their home base and basically works for the same masters they do.

He has so much money and power, that whether the current faction stays in power or a new faction takes over, its not going to matter much, he will still have his hundreds of thousands of employees working in his factories making some cool billions for SCM.

The NGO industry is enormous, there are a lot more than Soros, though he is one of the biggies.

Even without Soros’ activity in Ukraine, USAID operatives like Williams and Heller were in there working towards the eventual Westernization of Ukraine.

Also of note is...

http://www.opic.gov

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

from wikipedia:

“The Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) is the U.S. government’s development finance institution. It mobilizes private capital to help solve critical development challenges and, in doing so, advances U.S. foreign policy. It also finances projects, including a majority stake such as the 70%, $200m, it provided to Project Salvador, a solar plant in Chile. Because OPIC works with the private sector, it helps U.S. businesses gain footholds in emerging markets, catalyzing revenues, jobs and growth opportunities both at home and abroad. OPIC achieves its mission by providing investors with financing, guarantees, political risk insurance, and support for private equity investment funds.”

They were part of the efforts...

You’re welcome.

Sad that so many are so deluded.

You’re welcome; that was a good link.

You’re quite welcome.

Maybe its a “stage of capitalism” thing, as it does seem sort of shocking that single oligarch has a business conglomerate employing 200,000 people. In the U.S. today, you can only see that in a few of the largest U.S. stock exchange traded companies, where, ownership is very dispersed and diversified.

But, to my “stage of capitalism” point, we did have some very big “oligarchs” in U.S. business history and they did start what became some of the biggest and most successful companies in the country - some times (they had some failuires to).

Given Ukraine is only one generation removed from its Soviet past, maybe a bunch of “oligarchs” is not as unnatural as it might seem. I think we see the same thing happening now in this stage of China’s “capitalism” trasition.

Great effort. Thanks! The more practical and immediate question to answer, though, is which oligarchs should have more influence, eastern or western? And consider of consequences of the more autocratic oligarchs having more control over the world. Some situations, like it or not, are controlled by the rabble. Outcomes don’t always follow desires and plans.

The long term problem is that of choosing between more nationalism and empire. The U.S. nationalism of years past, based more on good deeds and less on communism/fascism, was not a bad way to go.

Sounds too complex. I tend to believe it has more to do with Joe Stalin. The ethnic Ukrainians bitterly hate that man and everything he did to their country. They will ruthlessly oppose any possibility that they will go back under Russian control. They will view any strong Russian leader as another Stalin.

Thanks! The more practical and immediate question to answer, though, is which oligarchs should have more influence, eastern or western?

You're welcome. I was surprised to find that Akhmetov's SCM (the most powerful oligarch) was receiving awards from USAID-sponsored organizations in 2011, leading me to believe that the oligarchs will land on their feet no matter what happens. One would expect that, at the end of the day, their primary allegiance would be to themselves. IMHO, this "Russian-aligned" oligarch "godfather" working with the US proves that.

Some situations, like it or not, are controlled by the rabble. Outcomes don’t always follow desires and plans.

Much of the article documents how USAID and presumably the rest of the US government, partnered with private capital, have been actively working towards this outcome for 20 years. IMHO, one can only conclude that the protestors are merely doing the final kick-in of the door.

To see how the people are, IMHO, pawns, one must keep in mind that companies like Kraft (you know, Velveeta(tm) cheese product) have been doing business inside Ukraine for nearly 20 years.

Just for the record, conservative and liberal Americans perhaps don't like to say it out loud, but you do know that American companies do business bigtime in Russia.

http://www.ibm.com/ru/ru/

http://www.dupont.ru/

http://www.boeing.ru/

While at the same time are suppliers (some pretty strategic) to the US government.

http://www-304.ibm.com/industries/publicsector/us/en/federal

http://www2.dupont.com/Government/en_US/

http://www.boeing.com/boeing/bds/military_aircraft/index.page?

Kind of tempers the "thrill" of having this big evil empire "adversary" for neocons, and for the "hard left" in American kind of makes the communist "dream" seem silly.

Sounds too complex.

This article does not offer any specific comprehensive theory about what is going on in Ukraine.

It is simply a recounting of facts as published on the web, interspersed with a bit of interpretation (IMHO, clearly identified as such) of those facts.

It is perhaps more facts than we are used to digesting all at once, but as I state early on:

"Unfortunately, I don't see a lot of background or historical information on the situation being posted, just current events, which then draw out fervent opinions. While the current events are certainly essential to monitor, without an understanding of the context the events are happening in, one can be dangerously misled about who the prime movers of the events are and what their true intents are. When our understanding is superficial at best, yet news coverage can draw us to react so vehemently in support of or in opposition to events, we become putty in the hands of propagandists. "

I tend to believe it has more to do with Joe Stalin. The ethnic Ukrainians bitterly hate that man and everything he did to their country. They will ruthlessly oppose any possibility that they will go back under Russian control. They will view any strong Russian leader as another Stalin.

Support for being close to Russia is towards the east, support for being close to Europe is towards the west. This is a widely known and published fact, as in the following article, which has maps that show the breakdown of ethnicity, etc.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/12/09/this-one-map-helps-explain-ukraines-protests/

IMHO, there is a lot more opportunity to learn by following the links and even broadening one's search. I think it's important for US citizens to know what their own US government is doing; many of the links point in that direction.

I rarely read blogs and pundits, except if they turn up in a web search. If the blog/pundit then presents leads of some kind, I for the most part consider them unsubstantiated, unless they appear to be of good quality (i.e., somebody really did their homework). If the lead is important enough to what I'm researching, I then go look for published reporting or source documents to try to verify the lead's information.

Spot on post!