Posted on 11/28/2004 5:12:15 PM PST by A. Pole
The Ukrainian opposition gave President Leonid Kuchma an ultimatum on Sunday, warning that it would block his movements unless he fired Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich and fulfilled other demands within 24 hours.
Yulia Tymoshenko, a top ally of Viktor Yushchenko, the challenger in the presidential election that officials say Yanukovich won, said that the opposition would give Kuchma until Monday evening to fire Yanukovich.
Tymoshenko told a rally of about 100,000 opposition supporters in Kiev's main square that protesters would block Kuchma's movements if he did not accede to their requests, which included the firing of regional governors who have threatened to seek autonomy.
"We know where he is, and we can prevent him from making a single step if he doesn't fulfill our demands," said Tymoshenko, a driving force behind the opposition protests that have swept Kiev since the disputed Nov.21 presidential runoff. [...]
(Excerpt) Read more at iht.com ...
The arrest of the ruling president is just another way to protest peacefully!
BUMP
It would appear that the division of the Ukraine was set in stone in the Gorbi-Kohl agreement of 1990 (according to this source, it was all supposed to take place in 12-15 years time):
For instance, according to the November, 1991 edition of the political journal Tydenik Politika, Mikhail Gorbachev and Helmut Kohl concluded an agreement back in 1990 by which Germany's "long-standing wish to assert hegemomy over, and to amalgamate with, Bohemia and Moravia--first through the partition of Czechoslovakia, and subsequently, via the intended further breakup of the Czech Republic...Under the Geneva accord, the Soviets further asserted that they would not object to the division of Yugoslavia, would agree to Croatia and Slovenia entering the German sphere of economic influence and interests, and would AGREE THAT CISCARPATHIAN UKRAINE would 'join Hungary IN THE EVENT OF DESTRUCTIVE ACTIVITIES BY UKRAINIAN NATIONALISTS.' Germany was to 'refrain from activity in respect of issues concerning Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia', and would not consider them within the sphere of fundamental economic interests."
Taken from the book by Christopher Story entitled "The European Union Collective: Enemy of its Member States", 2002, Edward Harle Limited, pp 200-201, 2002.
I think all of this needs to be understood in light of Putin's Leninist "logic" layed out by the following excerpt taken from the book "Perestroika Deception", written by KGB defector Anatoly Golitsyn (pp 17-19):
‘PERESTROIKA’, THE FINAL PHASE: ITS MAIN OBJECTIVES
‘The new method sees ‘perestroika’, not as a surprising and spontaneous change, but as the logical result of thirty years of preparation and as the next and final phase of the strategy: it sees it in a broader context than Soviet ‘openness’ has revealed.’
‘It sees it, not only as a renewal of Soviet society, but as a global strategic design for ‘restructuring’ the entire capitalist world.’
‘The following strategic objectives of ‘perestroika’ may be distinguished:
For the USSR
(a) ‘Restructuring’ and revitalization of the Soviet socialist economy through the incorporation of some elements of the market economy.
(b) ‘Restructuring’ of the Stalinist regime into a form of ‘Communist democracy’ with an appearance of political pluralism [= ‘democratism’, or false democracy].
(c) ‘Reconsructing’ a repressive regime with a brutal face into an attractive socialist model with a human façade and seeming similarity to the Swedish social democratic system.’
For Eastern Europe
‘Economic and political ‘restructuring’ of the existing regimes into pseudo-social democratic models while preserving specific national historical features such as the strong Catholic Socialist tradition in Poland and the pre-war democratic tradition in Czechoslovakia.’
For Western Europe
(a) ‘Bringing about a new political alliance between the pseudo-social democratic regimes in the USSR and Eastern Europe and the Euro-Communist parties and genuine social democratic parties in Western Europe.
(b) ‘Restructuring’ political and military blocs—NATO and the Warsaw Pact—and the creation of a singe ‘Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals’ incorporating a reunited, neutral Germany.’
For the main US alliances
(a) ‘Splitting the United States, Western Europe and Japan.
(b) Dissolution of NATO and the US-Japan security pact, and the withdrawal of US troops from Western Europe and Japan.’
For Third World countries
‘The introduction and promotion of a new Soviet model with a mixed economy and a human face in Latin America, Africa and Asia through a joint campaign by the pseudo-social democratic regimes of the USSR and Eastern Europe and the genuine social democrats of Western Europe led by the Socialist International.’
For the United States
(a) ‘To neutralize the influence of the anti-Communist political right in the American political parties and to create favourable conditions for a victory of the radical left in the 1992 US presidential elections (In this context, Clinton’s stay with top Communists in Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union during the latter part of the Vietnam war has profound and disturbing implications—TTS).
(b) To ‘restructure’ the American military, political, economic and social status quo to accommodate greater convergence between the Soviet and American systems and the eventual creation of a single World Government.’
The paramount global objective
‘The paramount global objective of the strategy of ‘perestroika’ is to weaken and neutralize anti-Communist ideology and the influence of anti-Communists in political life in the United States, Western Europe and elsewhere—presenting them as anachronistic survivors of the Cold War, reactionaries and obstacles to ‘restructuring’ and peace. Anyone who warns about Moscow’s true objectives is automatically branded a ‘Cold Warrior’, even by people who have doubts about Moscow’s motives.’
THE ESSENCE OF ‘PERESTROIKA’: AN APPLICATION OF 1920s’ LENINISM
‘The new method penetrates the façade, tears the verbal mask off ‘perestroika’ and reveals its true meaning—which Gorbachev and ‘glasnost’ have failed to do. Lenin’s teaching and the experience of the New Economic Policy [NEP] are keys to understanding the essence of ‘persestroika’ and the reasons for Gorbachev’s downgrading and renunciation of elements of ideological orthodoxy like the class struggle and his emphasis on common interests and the benefits of close cooperation.’
‘Lenin advised the Communists that they must be prepared to ‘resort to all sorts of stratagems, manoeuvres, illegal methods, evasions and subterfuge’ to achieve their objectives. This advice was given on the eve of his reintroduction of limited capitalism in Russia in his work ‘Left Wing Communism, an Infantile Disorder’.
‘The new method sees ‘perestroika’ as an application of Lenin’s advice in new conditions. Another speech of Lenin’s in the NEP period at the Comintern Congress in July 1921 is again highly relevant to understanding ‘perestroika’. ‘Our only strategy at present’, wrote Lenin, ‘is to become stronger and, therefore, wiser, more reasonable, more opportunistic. The more opportunistic, the sooner will you again assemble the masses around you. When we have won over the masses by our reasonable approach, we shall then apply offensive tactics in the strictest sense of the word.’
THE WORLDWIDE COMMUNIST FEDERATION (should they succeed…taken from Golitsyn’s book New Lies For Old, 1984)
‘Integration of the Communist Bloc would follow the lines envisaged by Lenin when the Third Communist International was founded. That is to say, the Soviet Union and China would not absorb one another or other Communist states. All the countries of the European and Asiatic Communist zones, together with new Communist states in Europe and the Third World, would join a supranational economic and political Communist federation (this is precisely what the Soviets have in mind for the impending EU collective—TTS). Soviet-Albanian, Soviet-Yugoslav, and Soviet-Romanian disputes and ‘differences’ would be resolved in the wake, or possibly in advance of, Sino-Soviet reconciliation (Golitsyn goes to great lengths in previous chapters to show how the split between the Soviets and the Chinese was completely healed immediately after Stalin’s death…however, they continued the illusion of a split to dupe the West into backing alternating sides, depending on circumstances—TTS). The political, economic, military, diplomatic, and ideological cooperation between all the Communist states, at present partially concealed, would become clearly visible. There might even be public acknowledgment that the splits and disputes were long-term disinformation operations that had successfully deceived the “imperialist” powers. The effect on Western morale can be imagined’ (the Soviets have employed this tactic on numerous occasions—TTS).
‘In the new worldwide Communist federation the present different brands of Communism would disappear, to be replaced by a uniform, rigorous brand of Leninism. The process would be painful. Concessions made in the name of economic and political reform would be withdrawn. Religious and intellectual dissent would be suppressed. Nationalism and all other forms of genuine oppositions would be crushed. Those who had taken advantage of détente to establish friendly Western contacts would be rebuked or persecuted like those Soviet officers who worked with the Allies during the Second World War. In new Communist states—for example, in France, Italy, and the Third World—the “alienated classes” would be reeducated. Show trials of “imperialist agents” would be staged. Action would be taken against nationalist and social democratic leaders, party activists, former civil servants, officers, and priests. The last vestiges of private enterprise and ownership would be obliterated. Nationalization of industry, finance, and agriculture would be completed. In fact, all the totalitarian features familiar from the early stages of the Soviet revolution and the postwar Stalinist years in Eastern Europe might be expected to reappear, especially in those countries newly won for Communism. Unchallenged and unchallengeable, a true Communist monolith would dominate the world.’
From my previous post: "Under the Geneva accord, the Soviets further asserted that they would not object to the division of Yugoslavia, would agree to Croatia and Slovenia entering the German sphere of economic influence and interests, and would AGREE THAT CISCARPATHIAN UKRAINE would 'join Hungary IN THE EVENT OF DESTRUCTIVE ACTIVITIES BY UKRAINIAN NATIONALISTS.'
I would only add that Soviets most likely meant that Germany "would AGREE THAT CISCARPATHIAN UKRAINE would 'join Hungary IN THE EVENT OF DESTRUCTIVE ACTIVITIES BY (CONTROLLED) UKRAINIAN NATIONALISTS (Meaning phony confrontations between LEADERS such as Yanucklehead and Yushchenko)."
Hmm, it is very unlikely that Germany and Soviet Union could do such planning of events for 12-15 ahead. It is not feasible and it would require super-human gifts of foreknowledge.
"Hmm, it is very unlikely that Germany and Soviet Union could do such planning of events for 12-15 ahead. It is not feasible and it would require super-human gifts of foreknowledge."
Since when does an agreement to divide up Eastern Europe into economic spheres of interest require super-human efforts? It was a deal, much like the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
Most of what Golitsyn has to say is totally expectable, anyway. So benevolence is not the most important human motivation, and "love of fellow man", whatever that is supposed to mean. People lie. Amazing.
There is a sucker born every minute. Horrible, I suppose.
I did not say "super-human efforts", I said that it would be superhuman to plan events 10-12 years ahead. Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed in August 23, 1939, the invasion of Poland started on September 1, the same year. It took only one week!
Don't stop with "New Lies For Old", be sure to give his latest book "Perestroika Deception" a read. You might also want to get a copy of Chris Story's (editor of Golitsyn's Second book) "European Union Collective: Enemy of its Member States."
"I did not say "super-human efforts", I said that it would be superhuman to plan events 10-12 years ahead."
I am sure these agreements were forged (at least by the Soviets) in anticipation of the PLANNED breakup of the Soviet Union. Makes me wonder how much Germany knew ahead of time.
bump
The alternative to the multi-polar world is uni-polar world where one country dominates the others. Can America afford it or should?
bttt
Do they have the budget and trade deficits larger than USA?
Is the unemployment rate calculated the same way as it is being done here?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.